RVS: Lecture ppt
Download as PPTX, PDF6 likes4,670 views
Rapid visual screening (RVS) is a procedure to assess building safety and seismic risk by visually identifying a building's structural system and vulnerabilities. The document discusses conducting RVS in Gangtok to screen for earthquake safety. It provides context on population and earthquake intensities. Guidelines are given on screening for issues like soft stories, floating columns, reinforcement, pounding between buildings. The screening aims to classify buildings based on risk to prioritize retrofitting to reduce seismic risk.
![RAPID VISUAL SCREENING OF
BUILDINGS
Chandan Ghosh, Ph.D., Dr. Engg.
Professor & Head [GeoHazards Divn.]
National Institute of Disaster Management
Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/rvs-lec-main2013-130727034430-phpapp02/85/RVS-Lecture-ppt-1-320.jpg)
![Haity EQ. 2010 – before and after
[importance of open space]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/rvs-lec-main2013-130727034430-phpapp02/85/RVS-Lecture-ppt-72-320.jpg)
![Site class as per FEMA 154
Site class A - Hard rock with measured shear wave velocity
greater than 5,000 ft/sec.
Site class B - Rock with shear wave velocity between 2,500
and 5,000 ft/sec
Site class C -Very dense soil or soft rock [velocity between
1,200 and 2,500 ft/sec]
Site class D - Stiff soil [velocity between 600 and 1,200
ft/sec]
Site class E - Soil profile with velocity less than 600 ft/sec
Site class F - Soils require site-specific evaluations
[liquefiable, peats, high plasticity, or very thick
soft/medium clays.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/rvs-lec-main2013-130727034430-phpapp02/85/RVS-Lecture-ppt-78-320.jpg)
![A dam construction site near
Singtam – secondary effect
[construction induced LS]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/rvs-lec-main2013-130727034430-phpapp02/85/RVS-Lecture-ppt-111-320.jpg)
RVS: Lecture ppt
- 1. RAPID VISUAL SCREENING OF BUILDINGS Chandan Ghosh, Ph.D., Dr. Engg. Professor & Head [GeoHazards Divn.] National Institute of Disaster Management Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India
- 2. RVS – what to screen? Threats from potential hazards – say Fire, Earthquake…. What are the scenario in our cities? 2
- 3. RVS for Gangtok – how? 3
- 5. MMI City Population VI Gangtok 31k VI Shiliguri 516k VI Mangan 1k VI Naya Bazar 1k VI Namchi 1k VI Singtam 6k NIDM visit 22-26 Sept 2011 VI MMI (Strong shaking) Felt by all, many frightened. Some heavy furniture moved; a few instances of fallen plaster. Damage slight.
- 6. VII MMI (Very strong shaking) Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction; slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures; considerable damage in poorly built or badly designed structures; some chimneys broken. VIII-MMI VII-MMI –Delhi ‘s fate
- 8. SAFETY PERSPECTIVES OF BUILT- ENVIRONMENT - WHAT IT CARRIES FINALLY?
- 9. Hyogo Framework for Action 2005- 15 Ensure that disaster risk reduction is a national and a local priority Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks and enhance early warning Use knowledge, innovation and education to build a culture of safety and resilience Reduce the underlying risk factors. Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective response at all levels.
- 10. Insured vs.Total Economic Loss in Major Natural Catastrophes 100% 47% 40% 8% 0.3% 2% 4% 5% 5% 6% 6% 7% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Bangladesh (Floods, 1998) India (Gujarat/Bhuj, 2001) El Salvador (San Salvador, 1986) Turkey (Izm it, 1999) M exico (M exio City, 1985) Honduras (Mitch,1998) Poland (Floods, 1997) Colum bia (Arm enia, 1999) Indonesia (Floods, 1996) Puerto Rico (Hugo, 1989) USA (Northridge, 1992) France (Storm Lothar, 1999) Insured Uninsured 5,000 4,571 2,000 21,591 10,024 5,000 3,700 1,660 Source: Swiss Re CatNet database, AXCO database 136 2,000 36,406 4,535Total Economic Loss (US$MM)
- 11. 11 What went wrong? Before 26 Jan 2001 Rao Lakha Chatri, Bhuj After 26 Jan 2001
- 12. Any documents/handbook for such buildings? 12
- 13. Who is engineer? Courage and integrity Thrust for Knowledge Integrity Capacity for sound judgement Capacity for hard work Imagination Instinct for economy Aptitude for leadership Accuracy for thought for action
- 14. John Smeaton Father of Civil Engineering ( 1724 – 1792 ) Civil Engineers are self created set of Men, whose profession owes its origin not to power or influence ; but to the encouragement of a great & powerful nation. We civil Ers/Ars can contribute Significantly towards above cause
- 15. History of Civil Engg In the beginning,Civil Engineering included all engineers that did not practice military engineering; said to have begun in 18th century France. First “Civil Engineer” was an Englishman, John Smeaton in 1761. Civil engineers have saved more lives than all the doctors in history — development of clean water and sanitation systems. Henry H.White, first KY Civil Engineering Graduate from Bacon (Georgetown)College in 1840. • Fall of 1886, “State College” (UK) established civil engineering degree. • JohnWesley Gunn of Lexington received first Civil Engineering degree fromA & M College (UK) in 1890. Constructing earthquake resistant structures is the best opportunity to save lives of human beings – A second opportunity.
- 23. Golcuk Mosque( Istanbul ) Standing Tall amidst erased buildings ( 1999)… Survival of the fittest
- 24. Totally collapsed & undamaged Builidings Northridge CA 1964Kobe Japan 1995
- 25. TV Tower Ahmedabad Undamaged Transmission Tower near Epicentre
- 26. Principal Reasons of failures…PrincipalreasonsoffailuresduringEarthquake 1. Quality of Concrete . 2. Construction on reclaimed soil . 3. Insufficient Depth of Foundation 4. Absence ofTie/Plinth Beams . 5.Absence of Beam at Sill level. . 6. Hollow Plinth or Soft Story. . 7. Stub/ Floating Columns 8. Odd shape of building. 9. Erroneous Structural Designs 10.Use of hand mixed concrete in columns
- 27. Eq. resistant construction – possible? 27
- 28. Context Buildings performance in earthquake Construction monitoring and PEER check Damage patterns and mitigations Economic feasibility of mitigation Health monitoring of buildings – RVS for Delhi Post-EQ. health check Road Map 28
- 31. Bhuj-2001 …This building was reduced by one floor – reason? livable?
- 32. Stone wall, 10.23% Conc. Wall, 2.63% Mud wall, 29.63% Metal sheets, 0.80% Brick wall, 44.92% Wood, 1.28% Bamboo, 10.51% Category of building stocks in India - Census (2001) Total houses = 24.9 million
- 33. Lok Sabha starred Q. on 22nd Nov 2012 Whether our infrastructures are vulnerable to impending hazards Economics of disaster – scientific or unscientific Mitigation measures – economically viable or not ANY ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT DONE SO FAR? AS OF 2004 REPORT – WE LOSE 2% OF OUR GDP EVERY YEAR
- 34. Faulty construction – who shall stop such practices?
- 35. Urban health & safety
- 37. Lalita park- after effect
- 38. Poor constructions - Shimla
- 39. What is RVS? RapidVisual Screening (RVS) is a cheap and fast procedure in assessing the safety of buildings and classifying them according to the risk that they pose in times of strong earthquakes. Primarily (1) identify the primary structural lateral load- resisting system, and (2) identify building attributes that modify the seismic performance expected for this lateral load-resisting system along with non- structural components
- 42. 42
- 44. • Site specific concerns and other comments • Maintenance concerns and other comments • General environmental control – housekeeping and other comments • Fire & Electrical Hazard Prevention and Safety Concerns And Other Related Comments • General safety concerns and other comments Name and designation of the field inspector/Engineer:_______________Signature:________ Experience of Inspector/engineer: Contact No.: Name and Designation of the Evaluator:________________ Signature:___________ Email: Contact No. ________________
- 45. Q1. Does the building have an open storey with just columns and no Unreinforced Masonry Infill walls, either at the ground level or at any intermediate storey level
- 46. Soft storey at the ground X-bracing takes care of shear forces due to earthquakes
- 48. Crushed cars
- 49. 49 Q2. Does the building have floating columns or floating structural walls (discontinued in the lower levels)
- 50. Q3. Are the columns having transverse reinforcement with 90o hook ends?
- 53. Q4. Does the building have slander columns and deep beams at any of the beam-column junctions?
- 54. Q7. Are adjoining buildings or adjoining parts of the same building separated by less than 2% of the height of the building?
- 55. Q12. Are the main load bearing columns oriented along the length of the building plan?
- 56. Pounding
- 57. Q17. Did the building suffer any significant damage in the past due to earthquake or other hazards? 57
- 58. On December 19, 2011, 8 people killed and 3 injured in a bridge collapse at Rangchang Khola, about 18 kms from Singtam towards Dikchu on the Singtam-Mangan highway. The incident took place when a 48-wheeler heavy trailer carrying transformer of Teesta Urja Project to its project site in North Sikkim was attempting to cross the bridge span.
- 59. Q18. Does the building possess any seismic retrofitting or strengthening measures? 59
- 60. Ludlo castle School –Delhi 2007 60
- 62. Q19. Does the building have basement with short openings/ventilations over ground? 62
- 63. opening at the basement above ground – good ventilation BUT
- 64. Q21. Are the load bearing columns continued from ground to top floors?
- 65. Building with NO columns at upper floors
- 66. Q22. Is there any alteration/modification done for extra room/wall cabinet any time in its lifetime? 66
- 67. Q24. Are the beam-column supports/junctions centrally positioned in all floors? 67
- 68. New constructions – no field check
- 69. Corner col. has diff. reibars, high tension wires too close
- 71. • Rise in population, robust democracy…. • Increasing gap between have and have nots…. • Unplanned and ill-planned settlements • Settlement in and industrialization of extremely exposed regions • Lack of enforcement mechanism…. • Lack of policy implementation… • Political will and attitude…. • Change in environmental conditions - Climate Change Reasons for globally increasing losses due to natural disasters – general…
- 72. Haity EQ. 2010 – before and after [importance of open space]
- 73. RVS - Rapid Visual Screening (1) identify the primary structural lateral load- resisting system, and (2) identify building attributes that modify the seismic performance expected for this lateral load-resisting system. (3)The screening is based on numerical seismic hazard and vulnerability score.The scores are based on the expected ground shaking levels in the region as well as the seismic design and construction practices for the city or region.
- 74. Rapid visual screening (RVS) Purpose of RVS is to classify “those acceptable as to risk to life safety or those that may be seismically hazardous” (FEMA, 2002a). RVS scores are a quantitative measure of the probability of collapse and collapse is the predominant determinant of life safety risk for buildings. RVS scores are useful in the evaluation of life safety risk and in the prioritization of seismic retrofit programs for populations of buildings.
- 75. LevelsofAnalyses 1. Rapid visual screening (RVS) procedure requiring only visual evaluation and limited additional information (Level 1 procedure).This procedure is recommended for all buildings. 2. Simplified vulnerability assessment (SVA) procedure requiring limited engineering analysis based on information from visual observations and structural drawings or on-site measurements (Level 2 procedure).This procedure is recommended for all buildings with high concentration of people. 3. Detailed vulnerability assessment (DVA) procedure requiring detailed computer analysis, similar to or more complex than that required for design of a new building (Level 3 procedure).This procedure is recommended for all important and lifeline buildings.
- 76. Use of RVS To identify if a particular building requires further evaluation for assessment of its seismic vulnerability. 2.To rank a city’s or community’s (or organisation’s seismic rehabilitation needs. 3.To design seismic risk management program for a city or a community. 4.To plan post-earthquake building safety evaluation efforts. 5.To develop building-specific seismic vulnerability information for purposes such as regional rating, prioritisation for redevelopment etc. 6.To identify simplified retrofitting requirements for a particular building (to collapse prevention level) where further evaluations are not feasible. 7.To increase awareness among city residents regarding seismic vulnerability of buildings.
- 77. Seismic vulnerability classification Building types (1) masonry buildings, (2) RCC buildings, (3) steel buildings, and (4) timber buildings.
- 78. Site class as per FEMA 154 Site class A - Hard rock with measured shear wave velocity greater than 5,000 ft/sec. Site class B - Rock with shear wave velocity between 2,500 and 5,000 ft/sec Site class C -Very dense soil or soft rock [velocity between 1,200 and 2,500 ft/sec] Site class D - Stiff soil [velocity between 600 and 1,200 ft/sec] Site class E - Soil profile with velocity less than 600 ft/sec Site class F - Soils require site-specific evaluations [liquefiable, peats, high plasticity, or very thick soft/medium clays.
- 79. Building system performance Ductility. Strength and Stiffness. Bracing/Seismic Resistant Components. Braced frames . Moment resistant frames (generally of steel or reinforced concrete) consist of beams connected to one or more columns to carry multi- dimensional earthquake forces. Horizontal Diaphragms are floor and roof deck systems that carry forces across the building to shear walls, braced frames, and/or columns. Shear walls are large structural walls placed in a building to carry forces from the roof and floor systems to the supporting foundation, and into the soils.
- 80. Cross walls are interior walls and partitions that are not necessarily continuous to the foundations, but which are attached securely to two floor diaphragms (the top side of a floor diaphragm to the underside of the floor above) and that are stiff and strong enough to resist the independent movement of the two connected diaphragms. Connections. Damping. Weight Distribution.. Building Configuration. Foundation / Soil Characteristics. ground shaking frequency played a significant role. Sites with rock close to or at the surface will be less likely to amplify motion, and with such sites, generally, the farther from the source of an earthquake, the less severe the motion. Resonance. Redundancy.
- 81. Building survey in East Delhi Lalita park building collapse – 71 died, 65 injured Judicial inquiry commission by Delhi Govt. Forensic investigation – NIDM (Jan-Apr 2011) Structural safety of all buildings in east Delhi – NIDM (May 2011 to till date)
- 82. 10000 building Survey in East Delhi MCD engineers trained at NIDM Format devised – more than 250 parameters Survey conducted by MCD engineers at 64 wards simultaneously Mapping done for 2 wards – 221, 222 Software developed
- 85. RVS in East Delhi by NIDM
- 86. 86
- 87. RAPID VISUAL SURVEY OF BUILDINGS IN EAST DELHI Building Identification GENERAL INFORMATION Building Name:__________________________________________________________________ Ownership: Public _______ Private______________________ Owner’s Name: __________________________________________________________________ House Number _______ , Street/ Lane No _______ ____________________________________ Name of colony ______________________________, District ____________________________ Nearby Landmark ______________, Delhi/New Delhi ____________ PIN __________________ Name of Police Station____________ Name of nearest Fire Station____________________ Note: Take representative photo and measurements, draw sketches/locations of stair cases, drains, etc. showing good and bad aspects from the view point of earthquake safety and vulnerability. 1. Building type: (a) Earthen building ___________________ (b) Stone in mud mortar _________________ (c) Stone in cement mortar _____________ (d) Brick masonry in mud mortar _________ (e)Brick masonry in cement mortar_______ (f) RCC Frame Building________________ (g) RCC Frame- shear wall Building ______ (h) Mixed Construction (specify):_________ 2. Building area: (a) Approved___, (b) unauthorized regularized__, (c) unauthorized________ (d) Rural Village_,(e) Urban village_,(f) Resettlement colony____, (g) others (specify)______ 3. Usage of the building: (a) Residential _____,(b) Commercial________,(c) Offices __________, (d) Public ________ (e) Storage ____,(f)Housing Society _____,(g) Hospital/Health centre __, (h) School ______ (i) Coaching Centre _ (j) Religious places ____,(k) Petrol pump __________, (l) Police station _ (m) Fire station ____, (n) Shopping Mall ____, (o)Community Centre __________ (p) mixed use ___ (q) Cinema Hall____, (r) Others (specify) ____ 4. Number of occupants/users (approximately):______________________________________ 5. Age of construction : (a) ongoing construction _____________________________________ (b) Constructed < 5 yrs ___, 5-10yrs ___, 10-20 yrs ___, >20 yrs ___ Others (Specify) ______ Ward Colony Code Block House Number
- 90. 640 256 320 548 608 612 658 971 863 925 1037 925 804 717 276 174 Total survey in North and South zone 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 TillApril30th May2nd May3rd May4th May5th May6th May7th May9th May10th May11th May12th May13th May14th May16th May18th May19th Survey in North and South zone
- 91. Residential 79% Commercial 11% Offices 0% Public 0% Storage 1% Housing Society 1% Hospital /Health Centre 0% School 0% Coaching Centre 0% Religious Places 0% Petrol Pump 0% Police Station 0% Fire Station 0% Shopping Mall 0% Community Centre 0% Mixed Use 8% Cinema Hall 0% Other (Specify) 0% Buildings surveyed by MCD ( 10334 no.)
- 92. Special survey Appartment 4% Commercial 13% Community centre 1% Educational 6% Fire Station 1% Hospital 5% Institutional 2% Mixed Use 9% Public 5% Petrol Pump 2% Police Station 1% Religious 2% Residential 34% School 4% Tank 0% Tower 1% Under Construction 9% Special survey - 300 buildings
- 96. 0.00E+00 2.00E+05 4.00E+05 6.00E+05 8.00E+05 1.00E+06 246-Ashok Nagar 272-Sonia Vihar Extn. 272-Sabhapur 262-Johripur/tunda nagar/ambedkar nagar 265-Shiv Vihar Phase-1&phase-2 212-New Ashok Nagar 214-Vasundhra Enclave 243-Nand Nagri 240-Old Seemapuri 215-Kondli 227-Ghazipur Village 239-Dilshad Garden 272-Sonia Vihar 268-Mustafabad & Old Mustafabad 266-Babu Nagar & Prem Vihar 267-Nehru Vihar,Munga Nagar & Chandu Nagar 272-West Karawal Nagar 266-Sadatpur 272-Rajiv nagar 272-CRPF Camp,Police Training School, 270-Khajoori Khas Extension 270-Chand Bagh 268-Brij Puri 261-262-Ganga Vihar 262-Gokalpuri 262-Gokalpur 225-Karkardooma,Rishabh Vihar,Surajmal Vihar, Yojana… 238-239-Jhilmil,Vivek Vihar,Karkardooma 225-Anand Vihar Metro ,Bus ,Railway 234-236-Kailash Nagar, Chand Mohalla Road Area In East Delhi
- 105. Professionally where we are now? Are the BIS codes and NBC enough? EQ. resistant technology well established – implementation & enforcement? Seismic microzonation – reaped by Code officials? Building Performance objectives fulfilled ? – who’s responsible? Are the designs PEER reviewed at site and design office? Are the construction quality ensured? Plans are passed but not structural details? Are the building life guaranteed for 50 yrs atleast? – Lab and field? 105
- 106. Non engineered buildings - Amritsar
- 108. New important constructions Who has designed the structure? What are the seismic design criteria considered for the building? What is the sub-soil strata at the site? Is there any simulation study done for the seismic performance of the building? Uniformity of concrete grade, cement grade, steel grade, water and processing of concrete making – ensured? 108
- 109. List of Indian Standards on Earthquake Engineering + National building Code 1. IS 1893 (Part I), 2002: Indian Standard Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures 2. IS 4326, 1993: Indian Standard Code of Practice for Earthquake Resistant Design & Construction of Buildings. 3. IS 13827, 1993: Indian Standard Guidelines for improving Earthquake Resistance of Earthen Buildings 4. IS 13828, 1993: Indian Standard Guidelines for Improving Earthquake Resistance of Low Strength Masonry Buildings 5. IS 13920, 1993 Indian Standard Code of Practice for Ductile Detailing of Reinforced Concrete Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces. 6. IS 13935, 1993: Indian Standard Guidelines for Repair and Seismic Strengthening of Buildings.
- 110. Landslides and roads conditions – after Sikkim Earthquake 2011
- 111. A dam construction site near Singtam – secondary effect [construction induced LS]
- 113. Geo-professional’s food for action Earthquake information – IMD reaches to public by FAX after USGS, despite having more than 100 seismographs in place Strong motion data – questionable integration and timely dissemination among 17+ organisations? Seismic microzonation of Sikkim – a geologist’s mindgame – very far from true ground reality – ignorance or incapacity or not yet handled by abled geotechnicians? Earthquake Codes – elegant and accountable to less than 3% of the country’s building stock. Majority in general use more “Steel” than proper “ductile reinforcement”as per IS:13925 Govt. reserves $1.5 billion / yr for up keeping 15000 KM hill roads – where is the economy? Teesta Urja’s hydel project cost over run shoot up by 300% --yet to start due to Geopolitics Govt. declared $5 billion aid package but no authentic damage documents yet made acceptable to Central Govt. by Sikkim Govt. 113
- 114. RoadMap Masons construct buildings without knowledge of disaster effects – skill building Enforcement of guidelines, Dev. Control rules, NBC-2005 etc. – need a separate LAW Estd. Of Mega CivilWorks Haat/Mall – where a citizen gets his house of choice with all agencies under one roof Disaster museum – e.g. Hiroshima, Kobe Live demonstration of EQ. in a building with people on board experiencing M-1 to M7.0
- 115. RoadMap –contd. Seismic observatories in association with ISRO’s Bhuvan & Gagan mission – GIS mode Live demonstration of Geo-tectonic process & Landslides, earthquake,Tsunami waves – defining safe vs. vulnerable built environment Real life Performance of prototype buildings subjected to Flood, cyclone, high winds, fire, ..vis-a-vis good practice in the country Museum for vernacular structures in the country
- 116. “Roadmap” Wheredoyouthinkwe are lacking? Knowledge & wisdom? Resources, data, materials? Technological knowhow? Skills & man power? Unforeseen events? …….right attitude…..commitment…will power?????? … New act, Law, … New constitutional amendment???
- 117. Thank you 117