EVALUATION OF SEISMIC DAMAGE OF SANKHU

SCHOOL BUILDING, NEPAL DUE TO NEAR-FIELD

EARTHQUAKES.

A Project Report Submitted in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirement for the Degree of

MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY
IN
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING
BY
RACHEL BEULAH. E (17091D2005)
Under the Esteemed Guidance of
Dr. CHENNA RAJARAM Ph.D

Assistant Professor in Civil Engineering, RGMCET

School of Civil Engineering

R. G. M College of Engineering and Technology
(Autonomous)
Nandyal 518 501, A. P., INDIA
(Affiliated to JNTUA, Anantapur, A. P., INDIA)
(Approved by AICTE, Accredited by N.B.A, NewDelhi, NAAC-A+ Grade)
2017 - 2019
 R. G. M College of Engineering and Technology
(Autonomous)
Nandyal 518 501, A. P., INDIA
(Affiliated to JNTUA, Anantapur, A. P., INDIA)
(Approved by AICTE, Accredited by N.B.A, NewDelhi, NAAC-A+ Grade)
2017 - 2019

CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the Project report entitled “EVALUATION OF SEISMIC DAMAGE
OF SANKHU SCHOOL BUILDING, NEPAL DUE TO NEAR-FIELD EARTHQUAKES.”
submitted by RACHEL BEULAH. E; Reg. No: 17091D2005. In partial fullfillment for the
award of Master of Technology in Structural Engineering in the R.G.M COLLEGE OF EN-
GINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (AUTONOMOUS), NANDYAL (Affiliated to Jawaharlal
Nehru Technological University, Anantapur) is a record of bonafide work carried out by her
under our guidance and supervision. The results embodied in this Project Report have not
been submitted to any other University or Institute for the award of any degree.

Signature of Guide Signature of HSCE

Dr. CHENNA RAJARAM Ph.D Dr.G.SREENIVASULU Ph.D
Assistant Professor Professor and HOD

Examiner:

Date:

i
Dedicated to my beloved parents, brother and teachers who have worked hard throughout my
education.

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

”GOD ALMIGHTY!! Thank you for giving me the strength and encouragement especially during all
the challenging moments in completing this thesis successfully. I am truly grateful for your exceptional
love and grace during this entire journey.”

I deem it a great pleasure and privilege to express my profound deep sense of gratitude to my project
guide Dr. CHENNA RAJARAM for his guidance, scholarly advice, imparting illuminating ideas,
benevolent attitude, a perennial source of inspiration, instinct moral support, and encouragement for
successful completion of our project work. He also taught me the time sense, discipline, and punctu-
ality, which indeed made me to accomplish this piece of work effectively, and on time. For all these, I
owe him profusely forever.

I take it as a privilege to express my thanks to the Head of the Department Dr. G. SREENIVA-
SULU for his continuous help and encouragement.

Iam highly grateful to Dr. T. JAYACHANDRA PRASAD, Principal, R.G.M. College of Engineering
and Technology, for his encouragement and inspiration at various points of time in the successful
accomplishment of this project.

I shall remain grateful to Dr. M. SANTHIRAMUDU, Chairman, R.G.M, College of Engineering

and Technology, who has been a constant source of inspiration throughout the project work and I also
seek his blessings for a bright future.

I express my special thanks to faculty and non-teaching staff members of this college who constantly
cooperated in the completion of the project work.

Last but not the least, my thanks to all those who helped me in the completion of this project
report.

RACHEL BEULAH. E
17091D2005

iii
 LIST OF PUBLICATIONS
1. Rachel Beulah.E, Chenna Rajaram*,2019, Evaluation of seismic damage parameters for rein-
forced concrete frame buildings ˝, Proceedings of International Conference on Innovative Trends
in Civil Engineering for Sustainable Development, NIT Warangal, India.

2. Rachel Beulah.E, Chenna Rajaram*,2019, Evaluation of seismic damage parameters of rein-

forced concrete Sankhu school building, Nepal ˝, Proceedings of National Conference on Recent
Developments in Civil Engineering Infrastructure, MANIT Bhopal, India.

3. Rachel Beulah.E, Chenna Rajaram*,2019, Evaluation of seismic damage parameters of rein-

forced concrete Sankhu school building, Nepal ˝, Proceedings of International Conference on
Structural Engineering and Construction Management, Kandy, Srilanka (Abstract accepted)

iv
 ABSTRACT
Earthquake is a natural catastrophe, which often turn into disaster causing huge damage to the struc-
tures and loss to human life. It is the result of a sudden release of energy in the earth’s crust, which
creates seismic waves. On 25 April 2015, the Nepal witnessed a severe earthquake where many people
lost their lives and huge loss to the structural buildings occurred. For the current study, a school
building named Sankhu in Nepal is taken which is of a four-storey Reinforced concrete 2-dimensional
structure to assess the damage. The dynamic analysis is carried out using a FORTRAN programming
tool Inelastic Damage Analysis of Reinforced Concrete structure (IDARC-2D). The ground motion
data from Himalayan region namely 2015 Nepal, 2011 Sikkim and 1991 Uttarkashi earthquakes are
considered for the reinforced concrete sankhu school building. The dynamic analysis is carried out to
different stations of the earthquake. The stations are considered as near-field ground motion due to
their distances from the epicentre. The results obtained are inelastic displacement responses,storey
shear, storey drifts and damage curves.The damage is expressed due to forward directivity, fling ef-
fects, and near-field ground motions.

KEYWORDS::Sankhu school building. Dynamic analysis. IDARC-2D. Near field. Far field.

v
Contents

ABSTRACT v

List of Nomenclature x

1 INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW 1

1.1 Introduction to Earthquakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Causes of Earthquake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.3 Major earthquakes in India . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.4 Damage due to earthquakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.5 Damage of School buildings during 2015 Nepal earthquake . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.6 Review of Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.7 Objective of this project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.8 Organization of the project report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

2 NUMERICAL MODELING OF A SANKHU SCHOOL BUILDING 9

2.1 Numerical modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2 Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2.1 Geometry details . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2.2 Material details: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2.3 Boundary conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2.4 Loading of the structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

3 CHARACTERISTICS OF GROUND MOTIONS 12

3.1 Ground motion characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.1.1 Amplitude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.2 Frequency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.3 Trifunac and Brady Duration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.4 Near-field ground motion parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

vi
 3.4.1 Rupture directivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.4.2 Type of fault . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.4.3 Fling effect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

4 SEISMIC DAMAGE ANALYSIS OF SANKHU SCHOOL BUILDING 24

4.1 Nonlinear dynamic analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
4.2 Displacement responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
4.3 Storey drift . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.3.1 Storey shear . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.4 Damage model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.5 Damage analysis of a school building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

5 GENERATION OF DESIGN SPECTRUM 33

5.1 Introduction to design spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
5.2 Procedure for generating design spectrum: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

6 CONCLUSION AND POSSIBLE FUTURE SCOPE 39

6.1 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
6.2 Scope of future work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

vii
List of Figures

1.1 Occuring of earthquake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

1.2 Ground shaking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3 Ground displacement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.4 Estimation of damage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.5 Damage of Buildings due to 2015 Nepal earthquake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.6 Damage of Buildings due to 1991 Uttarkashi earthquake . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.7 Damage of Buildings due to 2011 Sikkim earthquake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

2.1 Elevation of a Sankhu school building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

2.2 Plan view of a Sankhu school building (dimensions are in meters) . . . . . . . . 10
2.3 Reinforcement details of a beam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.4 Reinforcement details of a column . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

3.1 figures:a,b-Uttarkashi; c,d-Rudraprayag . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

3.2 Table 1.Characteristics of Nepal earthquake ground motion . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.3 Table 2.Characteristics of Sikkim earthquake ground motion . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.4 Table 3.Characteristics of Uttarkashi earthquake ground motion . . . . . . . . . 15
3.5 Forward directivity,FN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.6 Forward directivity,FP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.7 Backward directivity,FN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.8 Backward directivity,FP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.9 Shows type of fault . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.10 Strike-slip,FN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.11 Strike-slip,FP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.12 Dip-slip fault: Footwall and Hangingwall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.13 Dip-slip fault: Footwall, FN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.14 Dip-slip fault: Footwall, FP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

viii
3.15 Dip-slip fault: Hanging wall, FN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.16 Dip-slip fault: Hanginhwall, FP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.17 Fling effect, FN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.18 Fling effect, FP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

4.1 Fig:a,b,c,d-Displacement response of Rudraprayag station . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

4.2 Fig:a,b,c,d-Displacement response of Uttarkashi station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.3 Fig:a,b,c- Displacement response of Uttarkashi, Nepal and Sikkim earthquakes
respectively . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.4 Storey drift of Nepal earthquake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.5 Storey drift of Uttarkashi earthquake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.6 Storey drift of Sikkim earthquake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.7 Storey shear of Uttarkashi earthquake station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.8 Damage curve of Forward directivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.9 Damage curve of Backward directivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.10 Damage curve of Strike-slip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.11 Damage curve of Dip-slip: Footwall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.12 Damage curve of Dip-slip: Hangingwall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.13 Damage curve of Fling effect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

5.1 Table 1, Amplification factors: Elastic design spectra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

5.2 Table 2, Amplification factors: Elastic design spectra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
5.3 Design spectrum;Forward directivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5.4 Design spectrum;Backward directivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5.5 Design spectrum;Strike-slip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.6 Design spectrum;Footwall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.7 Design spectrum;Hangingwall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5.8 Design spectrum;Fling effect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5.9 All plots of design spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

ix
List of Nomenclature
RC = Reinforced concrete

IDARC = Inelastic Damage analysis of reinforced concrete

FEM = Finite Element Method

RC = Reinforced concrete

T = Time period

x
Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION AND
LITERATURE REVIEW

1.1 Introduction to Earthquakes

Earthquake is a natural catastrophe, which often turn into disaster causing huge damage to
the structures and loss to human life. About 1-lakh earthquakes of magnitude, more than 3.0
Mw hit the earth every year.

1.2 Causes of Earthquake

They generally cause when two blocks of the earth suddenly slip past one another. The surface
where they slip are called the fault or fault plane. Due to this the sudden release of energy
takes place that causes the seismic waves in ground shaking and ground displacement. The
location below the earth’s surface where the earthquake starts is called the focus or hypocenter
and the location directly above it on the earth’s surface is called the epicentre.

1.3 Major earthquakes in India

Indian subcontinent has a history of Earthquakes. The reason for the intensity and high fre-
quency of Earthquakes is the Indian plate driving into Asia at a rate of approximately 47mm/yr.

The following is a list of major Earthquakes, which have occurred in India:

(a) Kangra-on 4th April,1905 with a magnitude of 7.8

(b) Assam-on 15th August,1950 with a magnitude of 8.6
(c) Gujarat-on 21st July,1956 with a magnitude of 6.1
(d) Koynanagar-on 11th December,1967 with a magnitude of 6.5
(e) Uttarakashi-on 20th October,1991 with a magnitude of 6.8

1
 Figure 1.1: Occuring of earthquake

Figure 1.2: Ground shaking

(f) Latur-on 30th September,1993 with a magnitude of 6.4

(g) Gujarat-on 26th January,2001 with a magnitude of 7.7
(h) Sikkim-on 18th September,2011 with a magnitude of 6.9
(i) Nepal-on 25th April, 2015 with a magnitude of 7.8
(j) Nepal-on 12th May,2015 with a magnitude of 7.3

2
 Figure 1.3: Ground displacement

1.4 Damage due to earthquakes

The past incidents of the Earthquake that occurred in different parts of India has caused severe
damage to the buildings where many people lost their lives. Over a million structures were
damaged including multi-storey buildings, historic buildings and tourist attractions.

Figure 1.4: Estimation of damage

3
 Figure 1.5: Damage of Buildings due to 2015 Nepal earthquake

1.5 Damage of School buildings during 2015 Nepal earth-

quake
Schools are the gathering place of the new generation. They anticipated acting as a refuge after
an earthquake. On April 25, 2015, a severe 7.8 Mw, shallow earthquake with a focal depth of
15 km struck Nepal, Kathmandu, which is at a distance of 8 km from the epicentre. It was the
worst natural disaster to strike Nepal since the 1934 Nepal-Bihar earthquake. Making 25 April
2015 the deadliest day on the mountain in history. Field survey shows that 12 schools with var-
ious types of structures, including local characteristics reinforced concrete frames, mud-bonded
or cement bonded timber and masonry frames were damage due to Earthquake. The earth-
quake mainly caused due to sudden release of built-up stress, along the major fault line where
the Indian plate, carrying India, is slowly diving underneath the Eurasian plate, carrying much
of Europe and Asia. Nepal lies towards the southern limit of the diffuse collisional boundary
where the Indian plate under thrusts the Eurasian plate, occupying the central sector of the
Himalayan arc, nearly one-third of the 2,400 km long Himalayas. The convergence rate be-
tween the plates in central Nepal is about 45mm per year. The location, magnitude, and focal
mechanism of the earthquake suggest that it caused by a slip along the main Frontal Thrust

Kathmandu situated on a Kathmandu Basin, which consists of Sedimentary rocks up to 600 m

that are highly harmed to shaking.

4
 Figure 1.6: Damage of Buildings due to 1991 Uttarkashi earthquake

Figure 1.7: Damage of Buildings due to 2011 Sikkim earthquake

As stated by the reports,80% of the building constructions are non-engineered to poorly engi-
neered stone or brick masonry even in urban areas in Nepal. The 20% of RC construction also
covered by non-engineered to pre-engineered construction, which led to severe damage during

5
the 2015 Nepal earthquake.

The Sankhu school building lies on the top of the Manichud Jatra Naghi hill near shivapuri
National park, 25 kilometres north-east from Kathmandu. The school building is located 82 km
from the epicentre of the 2015 Nepal earthquake. The building is severely damage during the
earthquake. Many researchers are investigating to find out the damage of the school building
and few studies have discussed.

1.6 Review of Literature

LiDAR scans, used to create 3-dimensional point cloud of the building for the identification
of the locations and geometry of the major cracks also the measurement of the permanent
deformations of the building. Structure also instrumented with 4 unidirectional accelerometers
on each floors, which are used to validate a finite element modal of the structure. Finally, this
paper presented that Damage assessment, system identification and modelling of a 4-storey
masonry-infilled reinforced concrete frame building in Sankhu. The detailed damage assess-
ment conducted using sensing technologies (LiDAR). In this study, 32 terrestrial laser scans
obtained from 2 scanners has used to create a 3-dimensional point cloud of the building with
the locations and geometry of the major cracks identified. (Supratik Bose et.al, 2016)

The analysis of the typical earthquake damage characteristics of school building based on
Jiuzhaigou seismic building, the damage investigation data has done. It summarizes main fea-
tures of destruction to middle and primary school buildings from the earthquake. Also it puts
forward the aseismic building design and gives some suggestions on building site selection and
construction engineering design, which provide a reference for structural seismic strengthen-
ing. This paper concluded and suggested that the strong ground motion made buildings show
uneven settlement of foundation to earthquake intensity. Which is the leading reason for earth-
quake damage. Therefore, it is necessary to construct a solid construction. (Yushi et.al, 2018)

The seismic damage analysis to 12 schools with various types of structures including local
characteristic reinforced concrete frames, cement bonded or mud-bonded masonry and timber
frames during a field study conducted. The advantages and disadvantages of local construction
technologies have discussed. The earthquake phenomena, such as the effects of forward direc-
tivity, site configuration, earthquake sequence and safe distance from a slope have discussed.
The major reason for the mega lost during these earthquake sequences could be Soil foundation
interaction and some design problems. (Hao Chen et.al, 2017)

The usability checks performed on precast RC gyms and masonry school buildings, located
in the municipalities of ’San pietro in casale’ after the seismic events occurred on 2012 May
20th and 29th. First main features of surveyed buildings identified. Later, based on detected

6
damages, these seismic deficiencies recognized. Finally, indication of some appropriate simple
actions for retrofitting studied buildings has given. The damages observed within investigated
school buildings shown deficiencies such as lack of wall-floor connections, beam-to-column,
beam-to-beam and column-to-wall connections for precast RC ones. The identification seismic
deficiencies of investigated buildings have allowed individuating some simple interventions has
to use appropriately for this retrofitting. The actions they suggested are to use steel or RC
tie-beams, steel or RC jacketing of masonry walls. (Antonio Formisano, 2012)

The typical damage observed by author’s field survey in Miyagi prefecture. The reinforced
concrete structures performed well and the effect of seismic retrofit has found in the mitigation
of damage, although severe damage to some seismically retrofitted buildings have noticed. Some
buildings were selected for detailed investigation, a good correlation was observed between cal-
culated seismic capacity IS-index and observed damage. The major damage to non-structural
elements has commonly observed. The reasons for damage and lessons to seismic design have
discussed. The conclusion of this paper is, the investigation of reinforced concrete building
structures have presented, also the Japanese RC building showed good performance for saving
lives on Great Japan Earthquake. However, a few retrofitted buildings that has been evalu-
ated to be safe and they had to be evacuated after the earthquake. Data from buildings like
drawings, Earthquake records gives opportunities for future research to improve the reliability
of seismic performance evaluation methods. (Masaki at. el., 2012)

Non-linear numerical analysis has carried out to assess the vulnerability in terms of peak inter-
storey drift profiles and peak base shear. It concludes that the building proved to be highly vul-
nerable to seismic actions, when compared to limits proposed in various evaluations stan- dards
and guidelines, making it clear that the adaptation of retrofitting strategies has needed. The
purpose of the retrofitting solutions adopted and tested in these numerical simulations adopted
and tested in these numerical simulations work was to provide the structure higher stiffness
and thereby reduce the deformations imposed on the structure due to seismic ground motions.
The total jacketing solutions of the columns and the addition of the steel braces were the ones
that caused greater initial stiffness increase in the longitudinal direction. In the transversal
direction, however only when all columns has retrofitted with the RC jacketing solution were
the inter-storey drift rations reduced. (Hugo at. el., 2018)

1.7 Objective of this project

The main objective for the current study is to carry out the dynamic analysis for three Hi-
malayan region earthquakes ground motions namely 1991 Uttarkashi, 2011 Sikkim and 2015
Nepal and to find out the responses due to near-field and far-field ground motions. This nonlin-
ear dynamic analysis is to carry out by using a FORTRAN programming tool, Inelastic damage
analysis of reinforced concrete structure (IDARC-2D). The damage is express due to forward

7
directivity, fling effects, and near-field ground motions.

1.8 Organization of the project report

This project report consist of six chapters where,

Chapter 1: Includes Introduction to the earth- quakes and how they occur, followed by the
damage to the school building during the past earth- quake and literature review.

Chapter 2: Explains the modeling,Geometry,Material and Boundary conditions details of the

Sankhu school building which is considered for this study

Chapter 3: Deals with the characteristics of ground motions like Amplitude,Frequency and
Duration followed by the Near-field ground motion parameters.

Chapter 4:Describes the seismic analysis of the Sankhu school building namely displacement
response, storey drift,storey shear,damage model.

Chapter 5:Includes the generation of design spectrum, introduction, procedure and analysis
of the design spectrum.

Chapter 6:Explains the final conclusion of this project work and possible future scope followed
by the list of references for this study.

8
Chapter 2

NUMERICAL MODELING OF A
SANKHU SCHOOL BUILDING

2.1 Numerical modeling

The structure of the 4 storey sankhu school building is initially analyzed as per IS 456:2000
and modelled using IDARC by considering the building as a whole frame.

2.2 Properties
2.2.1 Geometry details
The building frame has with 32 rectangular columns, column size as 450450 mm and 28 beams,
beam size as 250400 mm with each storey height as 3000 mm. The lengths and widths of the
structural Sankhu school building shown in below figure.

2.2.2 Material details:

The grade of concrete and steel taken as M30 and Fe415 respectively. Area of reinforcement
for the columns and beams taken as 8-16mm dia bars and 6-12mm dia bars respectively. The
hoop bar spacing taken as 200mm; the size of the stirrups are taken as 6mm. The area of the
reinforcement in the top and bottom beams taken as 2-12mm dia bars and 4-12mm dia bars
respectively as shown in figures below.

9
 Figure 2.1: Elevation of a Sankhu school building

Figure 2.2: Plan view of a Sankhu school building (dimensions are in meters)

2.2.3 Boundary conditions

Fixed supports has provided at the bottom of building for all the columns to prevent from
displacing or rotating by external forces acting at certain locations. The analysis does not
consider soil structure interaction. All beam- column connections are rigid.

10
 Figure 2.3: Reinforcement details of a beam

Figure 2.4: Reinforcement details of a column

2.2.4 Loading of the structure

A dynamic load is any load of a structure whose magnitude direction and position varies with re-
spect to time. Hence, the structural response to a dynamic load is also time-varying. Structural
response to a dynamic loading expressed in terms of displacements, acceleration and velocity of
the structure. Generally, the earthquake resistance structures are analysed by dynamic anal-
ysis. The dynamic load is given to the structure for the analysis. The results obtained are
inelastic displacement responses, storey drifts, storey shear and damage curves.

11
Chapter 3

CHARACTERISTICS OF GROUND
MOTIONS

3.1 Ground motion characteristics

The Sankhu building is subjected to 38 ground motions from three earthquakes (1991 Ut-
tarkashi, 2011 Sikkim and 2015 Nepal earthquakes). All the 38 ground motions are considered
as near-field due to their epicentral distances from the earthquake stations. The ground motion
data is taken from COSMOS website.

The characteristics of ground motion for the three earthquakes and corresponding ground mo-
tions are as follows.

(a) Amplitude
(b) Frequency
(c) Duration

3.1.1 Amplitude
An Amplitude is the largest wave, recorded on the seismogram during an earthquake. The most
common way of describing an amplitude is with a time history. The ground motion parameters
may be acceleration, velocity, or displacement. The acceleration time history shows a significant
proportion of relatively high frequencies and most closely related to structural response and
to damage potential of an earthquake. The acceleration time history for Uttarkashi NW, NE
and Rudraprayag NW, NE are shown in figures. The acceleration and time for the Uttarkashi
and Rudraprayag are 1996 values, 39.92(sec) and 1984 values, 39.68(sec) respectively. The peak
acceleration (PGA) for Uttarkashi NW, NE are 0.237(g), 0.304(g) and Rudraprayag NE, NE are
0.0516(g), 0.0506(g) respectively. The highest PGA value recorded at Uttarkashi station of 1991
Uttarkashi earthquake. The Tribhuvan University (T V U EW ) has the highest PGA (0.2280g)
of 2015 Nepal earthquake and Geyzing with highest PGA (0.45g) from Sikkim earthquake.

12
 Figure 3.1: figures:a,b-Uttarkashi; c,d-Rudraprayag

3.2 Frequency
The frequency of ground motions seems to be the most important parameter to explain the
structural damage experienced during strong earthquakes. It also describes how the amplitude
of the ground motion is distributed among different frequencies, since the frequency content
of an earthquake motion will strongly influence the effects of that motion, characterization of
the motion cannot be complete without consideration of its frequency content. The Fourier
amplitude spectrum of a strong ground motion shows how the amplitude of the motion is
distributed with respected to frequency. It expresses the frequency content of a motion very
clearly. Z ∞
x(ω) = ẍ(t).eiωt dt (3.1)
−∞

3.3 Trifunac and Brady Duration

The duration of a strong ground motion can have a strong influence on earthquake damage and
also related to the time required for release of accumulated strain energy by rupture along the
fault. As the length, or area, of fault rupture increases, the time required for rupture increases.
As a result, the duration of strong motion increases with increasing earthquake magnitude. The
bases for the duration of strong earthquake ground motion is considered in terms of earthquake

13
magnitude, the epicentral distance. The highest durations for the stations of three different
ground motions are taken by using a tool Seismosignal, namely Srinagar NE (12.76 sec) of 1991
Uttarkashi earthquake, Melli NW (45.27 sec) of 2011 Sikkim earthquake and TVU EW (47.87
0sec) of Nepal earthquake.

Figure 3.2: Table 1.Characteristics of Nepal earthquake ground motion

Figure 3.3: Table 2.Characteristics of Sikkim earthquake ground motion

14
 Figure 3.4: Table 3.Characteristics of Uttarkashi earthquake ground motion

3.4 Near-field ground motion parameters

Ground motions close to the ruptured fault can be significantly different from those observed
further away from the seismic source. It is well known that near-fault earthquake may contain
distinct forward directivity pulse and fling step motion. These specifications of near-fault
earthquake records make structural responses to be different from those expected in far-fault
earthquakes. The epicentral distances, which are below 100km, considered as near-field ground
motion. A total of 38 ground motions are considered for this study from three earthquakes in
which all the 38 ground motions are near-field.

3.4.1 Rupture directivity

The another important effect of earthquakes is the Ground rupture. It occurs when the move-
ment of earthquake along the fault actually breakes the earth’s surface.

15
The rupture direction of 2015 Nepal earthquake is South-East,1991 Uttarkashi and 2011 Sikkim
has the direction of rupture towards NorthWest-SouthEast.

Forward directivity

The forward rupture directivity effect occurs when the two conditions are met:
1) When the rupture generates toward the site and
2) When the direction of slip on the fault is aligned with the site.
Usually the forward direction ground motions has high PGA value. Rudraprayag, karnaprayag
from 1991 Uttarkashi earthquake, Chungthang, Geyzing and Mangan from Sikkim earth-
quake, KTP(kiritipur; hill top),PTN(Patan),THM(Thimi),TVU(Tribhuvan university) from
Nepal earthquake are the forward directivity earthquake stations. From the forward direc-
tivity earthquake stations the TVU station’s frequency coinsided with the structure frequency
in the first mode. so it has maximum displacement value of 1.1m. The forward directivity (FN
and FP) graphs are shown below.

Figure 3.5: Forward directivity,FN

Figure 3.6: Forward directivity,FP

16
Backward directivity

If the rupture arises towards the opposite direction of the site is called Backward directivity.
The earthquake stations Barkot, Bhatwari, Ghansiali, Koteswar, Pulora, Srinagar, Tehri and
Uttarkashi from 1991 Uttarkashi earthquake are the backward rupture directivity earthquake
stations.
The Barkot station has high PGA values of 0.242(FN) and 0.248(FP) than the other back-
ward directivity earthquake stations, so it this station has got maximum displacement value of
0.065m.

The backward directivity (FN and FP) graphs are shown in below figure.

Figure 3.7: Backward directivity,FN

Figure 3.8: Backward directivity,FP

17
3.4.2 Type of fault
The 2015 Nepal earthquake occured as a reslt of thrust faulting on or near the Main frontal
thrist (MFT) between the two plates. It is a Dip-slip fault.
The 1991 Uttarkashi earthquake occured due to Main central thrust (MCT) and it is Dip-slip
fault.
The 2011 Sikkim earthquake occured due to Tiesta or Kanchanzanga fault and it is a Strike-slip
fault.
The strike-slip and Dip-slip faults are shown in below figures.

Figure 3.9: Shows type of fault

Strike slip

A fault in which rock strata are displaced mainly in a horizontal direction, parallel to the line
of the fault is a strike-slip fault.

The Chungthang, Geyzing and Mangan are the strike-slip stations, where the Geyzing sta-
tion has high PGA value but low frequency. The Mangan station has low PGA value but high
frequency so this station got high displacement response than the other two stations. The
below shown are the Strike-slip (FN,FP) graphs.

18
 Figure 3.10: Strike-slip,FN

Figure 3.11: Strike-slip,FP

Dip-Slip

Dip-slip faults are inclined fractures where the blocks have mostly shifted vertically. If the rock
mass above an inclined fault moves down, the fault is termed normal, whereas if the rock above
the fault moves up, the fault is termed as reverse fault. A thrust fault is a reverse fault with a
dip of 45 degrees or less.

For the Dip-slip fault, the Hanging wall is the block positioned over the fault, the Foot wall is
the block positioned under it.

19
 Figure 3.12: Dip-slip fault: Footwall and Hangingwall

Footwall

The Footwall includes Barkot, Ghansiali, Karnaprayag, Koteswar, Pulora, Rudraprayag, Sri-
nagar, Tehri, Uttarkashi, Geyzing earthquake stations. The Geyzing station has more PGA
value and has the displacement response of 0.09mts.
The below are the footwall graphs.

Figure 3.13: Dip-slip fault: Footwall, FN

20
 Figure 3.14: Dip-slip fault: Footwall, FP

Hanging wall

The Hanging wall includes Bhatwari, KTP, PTN, THM, TVU earthquake stations. The TVU
station has high frequency value though it has less PGA value, so the displacement response
of this station has more with 1.1mt.

The below are the Hanging wall graphs.

Figure 3.15: Dip-slip fault: Hanging wall, FN

21
 Figure 3.16: Dip-slip fault: Hanginhwall, FP

3.4.3 Fling effect

The fling effect is the permanent tectonic offset, caused by the rupturing fault in the recorded
ground motions near the fault, fling effect for the 36 stations are considered and observed that
36 stations has fling effect. The graphs for all the 36 stations FN and FP are shown below.

Figure 3.17: Fling effect, FN

22
Figure 3.18: Fling effect, FP

23
Chapter 4

SEISMIC DAMAGE ANALYSIS OF

SANKHU SCHOOL BUILDING

4.1 Nonlinear dynamic analysis

The Sankhu school building frame is subjected to near and far- field ground motion using
IDARC tool. This tool is based on Finite Element Method (FEM). The general dynamic equa-
tion of motion is given below.

[M ]{Ü } + [C]{U̇ } + [K]{U } = −[M ]{U¨g } (4.1)

Where [M] is mass matrix; [C] is damping matrix; [K] is nonlinear stiffness matrix;δ U and its
derivatives are the incremental displacement, velocity and acceleration vectors respectively.The
above equation is solved numerically using Newmark’s β algorithm with average acceleration
method (Chopra, 2001).

Rayleigh proportional damping is used in this analysis and the coefficients αM , and αK are
calculated is as follows:
[C] = αM [M ] + αK [K] (4.2)

2ξi ωi ωj2 − 2ξj ωj ωi2

αM = (4.3)
ωj2 − ωi2

2ξj ωj − 2ξi ωi
αK = (4.4)
ωj2 − ωi2

4.2 Displacement responses

The structural response due to earthquake are calculated in the form of Acceleration, Velocity
and Displacement, but the displacement response of the structure is the important parameter
to know the damage of the structure.

24
The near-field ground motion has more influence on the displacement of the structure. The
Bhatwari (NW) station which is located 21.7 km from the focus of the earthquake with peak
ground acceleration as 2.48 m/sec2 has shown more displacement of the structure when 1991
Uttarkashi earthquake ground motion is considered.

It is not possible to show all the displacement response graphs for each storey individually
for the three earthquakes. so Rudraprayag (NW, NE) for stories 1,4 and Uttarkashi (NW, NE)
for stories 3,4 for 1991 Uttarkashi earthquake are shown in below figures individually. And for
all the stations from three earthquakes are plotted as a whole graph are shown below.

Figure 4.1: Fig:a,b,c,d-Displacement response of Rudraprayag station

25
 Figure 4.2: Fig:a,b,c,d-Displacement response of Uttarkashi station

Figure 4.3: Fig:a,b,c- Displacement response of Uttarkashi, Nepal and Sikkim earthquakes
respectively

26
4.3 Storey drift
The storey drift is the ratio of displacement of two consecutive floor to height of that floor.
Storey drift is usually interpreted as inter-storey drift, the lateral displacement of one level
relative to the other level above or below. In structural design, lateral loads (earthquake, wind)
are responsible for the drifts, which often leads to the damage of the structure. If the drifts are
more for the structure, structure may get collapse.

Figure 4.4: Storey drift of Nepal earthquake

Figure 4.5: Storey drift of Uttarkashi earthquake

27
 Figure 4.6: Storey drift of Sikkim earthquake

4.3.1 Storey shear

Whenever an earthquake hits the building then the structure gets oscillates, the building will
respond oppositely, the opposite forces are nothing but lateral earthquake forces (Q). The storey
shear (V) is defined as sum of the lateral forces at particular storey.

Figure 4.7: Storey shear of Uttarkashi earthquake station

28
4.4 Damage model
Generally, in concrete structures, damage indices have been developed by researchers to calcu-
late the seismic damage sustained by individual structural members and complete structures.
These indications are based on the results of non-linear dynamic analysis during an earthquake.
The description about Park-Ang damage is as follows.

RC structures under seismic loading are generally getting damaged. This damage of RC
structures can be expressed as a linear combination of maximum deformation and absorbed
hysteretic energy. Park and Ang expressed seismic structural damage as follows:

xm EH
D= +β , (4.5)
xu Qy xu

where xm is the maximum displacement that the linear equivalent linear SDOF system would be
subjected to during base excitation, xu (= µ xy where µ is ductility) is the ultimate displacement
of the system under monotonic loading, β represents the effect of cyclic loading on structural
damage, EH represents the total energy dissipation in the structure during excitation and Qy
is the yield strength of the structure. Later, this model was modi?ed by and is follows:

xm − xy EH
D= +β (4.6)
xu − xy Q y xu

In the above equation, the first term does not take into account the cumulative damage, whereas
the second term does. The advantage of this model is its simplicity. In this analysis, the above
equation is used to estimate the amount of damage.

4.5 Damage analysis of a school building

It is very clear through the literature reviews that the Sankhu school building got major dam-
age.
The damage is expressed for the Sankhu school building is due to forward directivity,backward
directivity, fling effects.

The below are the Damage graphs:

29
Figure 4.8: Damage curve of Forward directivity

Figure 4.9: Damage curve of Backward directivity

30
 Figure 4.10: Damage curve of Strike-slip

Figure 4.11: Damage curve of Dip-slip: Footwall

31
Figure 4.12: Damage curve of Dip-slip: Hangingwall

Figure 4.13: Damage curve of Fling effect

32
Chapter 5

GENERATION OF DESIGN
SPECTRUM

5.1 Introduction to design spectrum

The design spectrum should satisfy certain requirements because it is intended for the design
of new structures, or the seismic safety evaluation of existing structures, to resist future earth-
quakes.

The design spectrum should consist of a set of smooth curves or a series of straight lines
with one curve for each level of damping. The design spectrum should, in a general sense, be
representative of ground motions recorded at the site during past earthquakes. If none have
been recorded at the site, the design spectrum should be based on ground motions recorded
at other sites under similar conditions. The factors that one tries to match in the selection
include the magnitude of the earthquake, the distance of the site from the causative fault, the
fault mechanism, the geology of the travel path of seismic waves from the source to the site,
and the local soil conditions at the site. While this approach is feasible for some parts of the
world, such as California and Japan, where numerous ground motion records are available, in
many other regions it is hampered by the lack of a sufficient number of such records. In such
situations compromises in the approach are necessary by considering ground motion records
that were recorded for conditions different from those at the site.

5.2 Procedure for generating design spectrum:

1. Plot the three dashed lines corresponding to the peak values of ground acceleration¨(Ug )
˙ g ) and displacementUg o for the design ground motion.
velocity(U
2. Obtain from Table 1 or 2 the values for αA, αV, and αD for the ζ selected.
3. Multiply ¨(Ug ) by the amplification factor αA to obtain the straight line representing a
constant value of pseudo-acceleration A.
˙ g ) by the amplification factor αV to obtain the straight line representing a con-
4. Multiply (U

33
 Figure 5.1: Table 1, Amplification factors: Elastic design spectra

Figure 5.2: Table 2, Amplification factors: Elastic design spectra

stant value of pseudo-velocity V.

5. MultiplyUg o by the amplification factor D to obtain the straight line representing a constant
value of deformation αD.
6. Draw the line A = ¨(Ug ) for periods shorter than Ta and the line D = Ug o for periods longer
than Tf.
7. The transition lines complete the spectrum.
Now illustrate use of this procedure by constructing the 84.1th percentile design spectrum for
systems with 5% damping. For convenience, a peak ground acceleration ¨(Ug ) =1g is selected;
the resulting spectrum can be scaled by η to obtain the design spectrum corresponding to ¨(Ug )
= η g.

The following are design spectrum graphs plotted against Time (sec) vs acceleration (m/sec2 )
for Forward directivity, Backward directivity, Strike-slip, Dip-slip, Footwall, Hanging wall and
Fling effect.

34
Figure 5.3: Design spectrum;Forward directivity

Figure 5.4: Design spectrum;Backward directivity

35
Figure 5.5: Design spectrum;Strike-slip

Figure 5.6: Design spectrum;Footwall

36
Figure 5.7: Design spectrum;Hangingwall

Figure 5.8: Design spectrum;Fling effect

37
Figure 5.9: All plots of design spectrum

38
Chapter 6

CONCLUSION AND POSSIBLE

FUTURE SCOPE

6.1 Conclusion
The dynamic analysis is carried out for the estimation of seismic damage of reinforced concrete
Sankhu school building, Nepal by considering 3 Himalayan region earthquakes namely 1991
Uttarkashi, 2015 Nepal, and 2011 sikkim earthquakes using the programming language tool
IDARC. The earthquake stations are seperated as 36 near-field ground motions considering the
epicentral distance as 100 km below from the focus. The four storey reinforced concrete sankhu
school building has entered into nonlinear inelastic zone indicating the damage of the structure
due to nonlinearity.

It is concluded that the Sankhu school building has more displacement response on the top
floor (fourth) due to near-field ground motions. The rudragrayag which is near-field ground
motion has got pre dominate frequency in the 4th mode, coinsided with the frequency of the
building and resonance condition occured got significiant damge of 1.5 damage index to the
structure.

Thus the Quantitive damge for the sankhu school building is found in this project through
deterministic analysis.

6.2 Scope of future work

1. Probabilistic damage analysis can be done.

2. Incremental dynamic analysis can be done and

3. 3D modelling of the Sankhu school building with the exact dimensions is needed.

39
 REFERENCES

1. Bureau of Indian standards (BIS) (2002), Indian standard criteria for earthquake resis-
tant design of structures. Part 1: General provisions and buildings IS:1893˝, fifth revision,
New Delhi, India.

2. Chopra AK (2001),Dynamics of structures˝, Pearson Education Inc, London.

3. Kramer SL (1996),Geotechnical earthquake engineering˝,Pearson Publishers, London.

4. Rajaram Chenna, Pradeep Kumar Ramancharla (2018),Damage assessment due to pound-

ing between adjacent structures with equal and unequal heights˝, Journal of Civil Struc-
tural Health Monitoring.

5. 5. Supratik Bose, Amin Nozari, MohammadEbrahim Mohammadi, Andreas Stavridis,

Moaveni Babak, Richard Wood, Dan Gillins, Andre Barbosa (2016), Structural assess-
ment of a school building in Sankhu, Nepal damaged due to Torsional response during
the 2015 Gorkha Earthquake˝,Dynamics of Civil Structures, Volume 2.

6. Hao Chen, Quancai Xie, Riqing Lan, Zhiqiang Li, Chong Xu, Shizhou Yu (2017),Seismic
damage to schools subjected to Nepal Earthquake 2015 ˝,The Author(s) 2017.

7. DUAN Yushi, BO Jingshan, LI Xiaobo, Su Zhandong (2018),Earthquake damage anal-

ysis of school buildings in Jiuzhaigou˝,Materials Science and Engineering.

8. 7. Masaki Maeda, Hamood Ahmed Al-Washali, Kanako Takahashi, Kazuki Suzuki (2012),Damage
to Reinforced concrete school buildings in ’Miyagi’ after the 2011 Great East Japan Earth-
quake˝,Proceedings of the International Symposium on Engineering.

9. Humberto Varum, Rakesh Dumaru, Andr Furtado, Andr R.Barbosa, Dipendra Gautam
and Hugo Rodrigues (2017),Seismic Performance of Buildings in Nepal after the Gorkha
Earthquake˝

10. M. Davoodi, M. Sadjadi (2015),Assessment of near-field and far-field strong ground

motion effects on soil-structure SDOF system ˝,International journal of civil engineering.

11. Dimitris L., Karabalis(2014),Earthquake Response Spectra and Design Spectra˝, Ency-
clopedia of Earthquake Engineering, Springer.

12. F Moradpouri, and M Mojarab(2012),Determination of horizontal and vertical design

spectra based on ground motion records at Lali tunnel, Iran˝, Earthq Sci.

13. A. Paul, M.L. Sharma, V.N. Singh(1998),Estimation of focal parameters for Uttarkashi
earthquake using peak ground horizontal accelerations ˝, ISET Journal of Earthq.Tech.

14. Sumer Chopra, Vikas Kumar, Anup Suthar, Pankaj Kumar(2012),Modeling of strong
ground motions for 1991 Uttarkashi,1999 Chamoli earthquakes,and a hypothetical great
earthquake in GarhwalKumaun Himalaya˝, Nat Hazards.

40
15. Arjun Kumar, Ashwani Kumar and Himanshu Mittal(2013),Earthquake source parame-
ters review in Indian context ˝, International Journal of Civil, Structural,Environmental
and Infrastructure Engineering Research and Development (IJCSEIERD) Vol. 3, Issue 1.

16. H.N.Srivastava1, Mithila Verma and B.K.Bansal(2018),Fault Rupture Directivity of

Large Earthquakes in Himalaya˝,JOURNAL GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF INDIA,Vol.91,
pp.9-14.

17. Lifen Zhanga, Jinggang Li, Wulin Liao, Qiuliang Wang(2016),Source rupture process of
the 2015 Gorkha, Nepal Mw7.9 earthquake and its tectonic implications˝,geodesy and
geodynamics , vol 7, no 2,124-131

18. S.T.G. Raghukanth, K.Lakshmi Kumari and B.Kavitha(2012), Estimation of ground mo-
tion during the 18th September 2011 Sikkim Earthquake ˝, Geomatics, Natural Hazards
and Risk,Vol. 3, No. 1,934.

19. Santanu Baruah, Sowrav Saikia, Saurabh Baruah, Pabon K. Bora, Ruben Tatevossian
and J. R. Kayal(2016),The September 2011 Sikkim Himalaya earthquake Mw 6.9: is it
a plane of detachment earthquake? ˝,Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk,Vol.7, No.1,
248-263.

20. Rajesh Prakash, R.K.Singh and H.N.Srivastava(2016),Nepal earthquake 25 April 2015:

source parameters, precursory pattern and hazard assessment ˝,Geomatics, Natural Haz-
ards and Risk, VOL.7,NO.6,1769-1784.

41