Seismic response of current RC buildings in Nepal: A comparative analysis of different design/construction

Abstract This paper presents the seismic response of the current reinforced concrete (RC) buildings in Nepal. It was achieved by non-linear static and dynamic analyses of four structures corresponding to four scenarios of design/construction, namely a building: (i) representing the Current Construction Practice (CCP) (ii) the Nepal Building Code (NBC), (iii) the Modified Nepal Building Code (NBC+) and (iv) a Well Designed Structure (WDS). The seismic demands are analyzed and discussed in terms of base shear, maximum roof displacement, capacity curve and inter-storey drift. The results indicate a good correlation between the static and dynamic methods. The Current Construction Practice (CCP) structure and Nepal Building Code (NBC) structures experience inter-storey drift demands higher than the other models and they also present some irregularities in the drift profile. The modified Nepal Building Code (NBC+) and Well Designed Structure (WDS) have presented a better performance with low inter-storey drifts. Finally, the safety assessment is performed based on drift limit proposed by ATC-40 and FEMA-356, showing that CCP and NBC building are highly vulnerable to earthquakes.

[1]  Rui Pinho,et al.  ADVANTAGES AND LIMITATIONS OF ADAPTIVE AND NON-ADAPTIVE FORCE-BASED PUSHOVER PROCEDURES , 2004 .

[2]  Humberto Varum,et al.  Reflection on the seismic vulnerability associated to common RC buildings in Nepal , 2012 .

[3]  M. Menegotto.  Method of Analysis for Cyclically Loaded R. C. Plane Frames Including Changes in Geometry and Non-Elastic Behavior of Elements under Combined Normal Force and Bending , 1973 .

[4]  Ahmed Ghobarah,et al.  The impact of the 26 December 2004 earthquake and tsunami on structures and infrastructure , 2006 .

[5]  Adem Doǧangün,et al.  Performance of reinforced concrete buildings during the May 1, 2003 Bingöl Earthquake in Turkey , 2004 .

[6]  Adrian M. Chandler,et al.  Assessment of low-rise building with transfer beam under seismic forces , 2003 .

[7]  Anil K. Chopra,et al.  Evaluation of Modal and FEMA Pushover Analyses: SAC Buildings , 2004 .

[8]  Rui Pinho,et al.  DEVELOPMENT AND VERIFICATION OF A DISPLACEMENT-BASED ADAPTIVE PUSHOVER PROCEDURE , 2004 .

[9]  Juan Enrique Martinez Rueda.  Energy dissipation devices for seismic upgrading of RC structures , 1997 .

[10]  J. Mander,et al.  Theoretical stress strain model for confined concrete , 1988 .

[11]  Andrew S. Whittaker,et al.  Performance of reinforced concrete buildings during the August 17, 1999 Kocaeli, Turkey earthquake, and seismic design and construction practise in Turkey , 2003 .

[12]  Ahmed Ghobarah,et al.  Performance-based design in earthquake engineering: state of development , 2001 .

[13]  Rita Bento,et al.  VERIFICATION OF AN ADAPTIVE PUSHOVER TECHNIQUE FOR THE 3D CASE , 2006 .

[14]  Jitendra Bothara,et al.  General observations of building behaviour during the 8th October 2005 Pakistan earthquake , 2008 .

[15]  Amr S. Elnashai,et al.  Performance of composite steel/concrete members under earthquake loading. Part I: Analytical model , 1993 .

[16]  Sashi K. Kunnath,et al.  Adaptive Spectra-Based Pushover Procedure for Seismic Evaluation of Structures , 2000 .

[17]  Amr S. Elnashai,et al.  Static pushover versus dynamic collapse analysis of RC buildings , 2001 .

[18]  Sashi K. Kunnath,et al.  Assessment of current nonlinear static procedures for seismic evaluation of buildings , 2007 .