Earthquake resistant architecture

Forthcoming April 2017

http://upers.kuleuven.be/en/book/9789462701052

Chapters by:
Simon Jusseret (The University of Texas at Austin, Université catholique de Louvain)
Manuel Sintubin (KU Leuven)
Jan Driessen (Université catholique de Louvain)
Susan E. Hough (U.S. Geological Survey)
James P. McCalpin (GEO-HAZ Consulting Inc.)
Christoph Grützner (RWTH Aachen University, University of Cambridge)
Thomas Wiatr (RWTH Aachen University, German Federal Agency for Cartography and Geodesy)
Charalampos Fassoulas (Natural History Museum of Crete, University of Crete)
Gerassimos A. Papadopoulos (National Observatory of Athens)
Jack Mason (RWTH Aachen University)
Klaus Reicherter (RWTH Aachen University)
Clairy Palyvou (Aristotle University of Thessaloniki)
Eleftheria Tsakanika (National Technical University of Athens)
Jeffrey S. Soles (University of North Carolina – Greensboro)
Floyd W. McCoy (University of Hawaii – Windward)
Rhonda Suka (Research Corporation of the University of Hawaii)
Colin F. Macdonald (The British School at Athens)
Tim Cunningham (Université catholique de Louvain)

Jusseret S., Sintubin M. (2017). Earthquakes and Minoan Crete: breaking the myth through interdisciplinarity. In Minoan Earthquakes: Breaking the Myth through Interdisciplinarity, Jusseret S., Sintubin M. (eds). Studies in Archaeological Sciences 5. Leuven University Press: Leuven, 385-395.

Annually, natural disasters cause loss of life, damage to property, and
environment concomitant is damage to the cultural heritage property. In
the wake disaster occurrence, containment and response efforts put
cultural resources at risk due to ignorance from conservation experts,
policy makers particularly in developing countries like India as compared to
many counties across the globe. Theoretical and conceptual premises
indicate that seismic retrofit leading to preservation of historic structures
requires the satisfaction of the requirements of aesthetics, architecture,
engineering and technology. Protection of cultural heritage from natural
hazards and disasters is remained a neglected issue which has not been
adequately accommodated in legislation or in national laws, by-laws and
other documents worldwide by and large with a few exceptions. The
present prevention and emergency measures are focused on saving human
lives which result in total failure to protect cultural heritage assets as
observed in Bhuj earthquake of 2001 India. The existing databases
regarding cultural heritage in the country are fragmented and incomplete,
and do not contain authentic data that is essential for natural hazard risk
assessment processes and risk management approaches. Research
establishes that conventional strengthening methods, especially those
involving ‘invisible’ intervention, will continue to play an important part in
the seismic protection of historic structures. However, the development of
innovative technology for wider application is felt for heritage buildings in
India. Using the interpretive approach this paper discusses the technical
issues pertaining to the seismic retrofit of historic buildings, and explores
various practices which are in current use in India for conservation of
historic buildings. Based on past experiences it evaluates the feasibility of
traditional as well as innovative technologies considering the character of
Indian heritage built stock. Present paper endeavors to put forth the key
challenges and achievements in heritage conservation with reference
seismic environment in India. Considering the vulnerability of heritage
buildings from seismic activity it is aimed to explore the measures required to render them strong enough to sustain damages on earthquake
occurrence for posterity.

Shear walls are a type of structural system that provides lateral resistance to a building or structure. They resist in-plane loads that are applied along its height. The applied load is generally transferred to the wall by a diaphragm or collector or drag member. In the present work thirty story building with C Shape, Boxshape, EShape, I shape and new shape (Plus shape +) RC Shear wall at the center in Concrete Frame Structure with fixed support conditions under different type of soil for earthquake zone V as per IS 1893 (part 1) : 2002 in India are analyzed using software ETABS by Dynamic analysis. All the analyses have been carried out as per the Indian Standard code books. This paper aims to Study the behavior of high rise structure with dual system with Different Type of RC Shear Walls (C,Box,E,I and Plus shapes) under different type of soil condition with seismic loading. Estimation of structural response such as; storey displacements &Time period and frequency is carried out.In dynamic analysis; Response Spectrum method is used .It was found that the behavior of new shape (plus shape) of RC shear wall are not more different with I and box shape and also there is no more difference between 1.5 (DL + EL) and 1.2 (DL + IL ± EL) combination load. Time period is a significant factor for the shear wall and its position which is not only influenced by the type of soil. As per analysis and results, in structure two is showing the low time period which shows a very significant performance. The displacement is influenced by accommodating shear wall and also by changing soil condition. The better performance for structure two (box shape of shear walls) & with soft soil because it has low displacement.

The 17 August 1999 and 12 November 1999 earthquakes in Western Anatolia provided undesirable field evidence that most of the low story residential reinforced concrete buildings have very poor earthquake resistance. Architectural design faults negatively affect the structural behavior of buildings. In Turkey, earthquake-resistant design is considered to be exclusively within the field of responsibility of structural engineers. As a result, architects and especially students of architecture are not well informed about the effect of their design decisions on the seismic performance of the buildings. Structural damages in collapsed buildings demonstrate that most of the design faults that lead to destruction of buildings are due to architectural decisions. This paper intends to present the concept of earthquakeresistant design in a comprehensible format for the architects and builders, therefore aims to contribute to the efforts of creating a better awareness of earthquake resistant building design. r

The paper discusses the term "earthquake architecture" as a result of intersection of design principles in architecture and earthquake engineering. It examines the hypothesis that the architectural design which reflects an earthquake threat might be an important source of stronger architectural identity typical for earthquake prone areas. The purpose of the paper is to encourage the development of new principles and forms of architectural design in these areas. Technology, codes and cooperation with earthquake engineers are not the only or satisfactory solutions for appropriate culturally respectful design of buildings and landscape in earthquake prone areas. The possibilities of architectural response to an earthquake threat are further analyzed. The paper describes earthquake engineering and architectural background of earthquake architecture and gives some examples of positive practise. The intensity of relations between the two fields is divided into different levels. Higher levels of intensity interfere more into the field of earthquake architecture. The given examples interpret various possible levels of cooperation within earthquake architecture.

The paper analyses news from the Zagreb press and the archival
sources (from institutions of the Croatian Provincial
Government and the City of Zagreb) on how the damaged
buildings were repaired immediately after the earthquake
that struck Zagreb on November 9, 1880. The focus is on the
intensity of construction activity and the issues that arose
in relation to the construction and urban planning shortly
after the natural disaster, during 1881.
As it was a strong earthquake, with a magnitude of 6.1–6.3
on the Richter scale, and as Zagreb was a small town with
28,360 inhabitants, almost no buildings were left undamaged
and a considerable number of buildings had to be torn down
partially or completely.
Due to the fear of new earthquakes, the damaged buildings
were repaired primarily so as to strengthen them. Iron clasps
were installed in walls and roofs, the intense use of iron
beams, and the construction of thicker firewalls and gable
walls, reinforced with pylons, was recommended. In addition
to iron, concrete was now increasingly used in architecture.
Numerous alterations and additions to the existing buildings,
frequently of poor quality, were declared the main
culprit for the collapse of parts of buildings in the earthquake,
as their structures could not withstand the weight
of the added floors.
Floating staircases, which largely collapsed or became dangerous
to use, proved to be a great problem, so after the
earthquake they were reinforced with various types of iron
beams or pillars, or were completely rebuilt. Another problem
were the vertical decorations on the roofs of buildings,
pedestals, sculptures, and balustrades, especially if they
were not firmly attached with iron clamps to the structural
parts. Although it was recommended to use them less, such
decorations remained a specificity of Zagreb’ s architecture
in the coming decades.
Part of the intellectual elite of Zagreb and Croatia, specifically
the politician and first Croatian art historian Iso Kršnjavi and
Josip Juraj Strossmayer, Bishop of Đakovo, realized that the
natural disaster that had struck Zagreb was also an extraordinary
opportunity for quality reconstruction and the future
flourishing of the city. They believed that the earthquake had
further emphasized the need to restore Zagreb’ s medieval
monuments. Kršnjavi encouraged the use of decorations
attached to the construction, i.e. the construction of fronts
made of façade bricks and wooden ceilings inside buildings
that were uncovered with plaster, but his incentives had only
limited success.
After the basic rebuilding of the city was completed by the
end of 1880, during 1881 major repairs of the damaged
buildings continued, along with new constructions. A large
number of lavish residential and residential-commercial
buildings were erected, of which the Baumgärtner and Prister
houses in the central city square, Ban Jelačić Square, and
the Vranyczany house on today’ s Strossmayer Square stand
out. The construction of the Baumgärtner house raised the
issue of designing the northern side of Ban Jelačić Square,
where the construction of two- and three-storey buildings
with variously shaped fronts was planned.
The earthquake also raised the issue of urban transformation
of the old part of the city, widening its streets and squares,
and correcting the street routes, but due to lack of funds,
only minor interventions (removal of individual buildings)
were carried out during 1881.
Although many plans remained unrealized, the earthquake
of November 9, 1880 served as a catalyst for change in the
history of Zagreb’ s architecture and urban planning.

The highly congested building system in many metropolitan cities constitutes a major concern for seismic
pounding damage as observed in past earthquakes. Majority of buildings located in Indian cities are very
closely spaced without adequate seismic separation. Such a building stock has to be identified and
analyzed with reference to its vulnerability to earthquake damages to facilitate action taken for its
strengthening, retrofitting to minimize pounding in case of earthquake occurrence. Pune is one of rapidly
growing Industrial city of India located about 175 miles from Mumbai. In the historic city of Pune where
land cost are sky reaching majority of buildings in downtown are constructed with small or no separation.
A large amount of such buildings might suffer pounding damage in case of earthquake occurrence. This
paper presents a study on this potential hazard to buildings located on old districts of historic city of Pune.