Performance of a ten-story reinforced

concrete building damaged in the

2015 Nepal Gorkha Earthquake

Satish BHAGAT1, Susumu KONO1, Anil C. WIJEYEWICKREMA1

Koichi KUSUNOKI2, Seitaro TAJIRI2 and Hisatoshi KASHIWA3
1
Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan
bhagat.s.aa@m.titech.ac.jp, kono@serc.titech.ac.jp,
wijeyewickrema.a.aa@m.titech.ac.jp
2
University of Tokyo, Japan
kusunoki@eri.u-tokyo.ac.jp, tajiri@arch.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp
3
Building Research Institute, Japan
kashiwa@kenken.go.jp

ABSTRACT

An earthquake of moment magnitude Mw = 7.8 occurred in Gorkha district, Nepal on

April 25, 2015 followed by an aftershock of Mw = 7.3 in Dolakha district on May 12,
2015. The earthquake resulted in damage to more than 700,000 houses leaving over two
million people homeless. A majority of the buildings in the affected regions were either
load bearing masonry or reinforced concrete frame structures. In this paper, a ten-story
reinforced concrete residential building that sustained damage in the 2015 Gorkha
Earthquake is considered as a case study. The building comprises of moment resisting
frames with core walls for the elevator shafts. The structural members suffered minor
flexural and shear cracks, while the non-structural brick walls suffered multiple shear
cracks. The building was investigated by the authors one month after the earthquake and
information on damage was collected. A three-dimensional finite element model of the
building was created and pushover analysis and nonlinear response history analysis
under bidirectional seismic excitation were carried out. Although, the building was
designed following the Indian Standards, the seismic resistant capacity of the building
was found to be inadequate from the analysis.

Keywords: bidirectional seismic excitation, lateral load carrying capacity, pushover

analysis, reinforced concrete building, 2015 Nepal Gorkha Earthquake

1. INTRODUCTION

Reinforced concrete (RC) buildings are the most common type of medium- to high-rise
construction in urban areas of Nepal. Moment frames in the RC structures serve as the
primary lateral load resisting system as they provide sufficient stiffness and strength. In
addition to the moment frames, use of shear walls and core walls provide additional lateral
force resistance to the buildings. Some of the RC buildings in Nepal are constructed
following the Indian Standards (IS 13920:1993, IS 1893:2002), while many buildings are
October 2015, Kathmandu, Nepal

not designed to resist seismic loads. A detailed review of the design and construction
practice of RC buildings in Nepal can be found in Chaulagain et al. (2013). During the
2015 Nepal Gorkha Earthquake, many RC buildings were severely damaged while some
of them sustained minor damage. Some of the high-rise apartment buildings suffered
minor damage, leading to a reduction of the residual strength of the structure.

In this paper, a high-rise apartment building that sustained minor damage during the
earthquake is considered as a case study. The building was designed following the IS
13920:1993 and IS 1893:2002. Three-dimensional nonlinear static analysis (i.e.
pushover) and nonlinear response history analysis of the building are performed to
evaluate the capacity of the building and to study the seismic performance.

2. BUILDING DESCRIPTION

The building considered in this study is located in Lalitpur sub-metropolitan city. It is a

3-bay by 4-bay, 10-story RC building with a uniform floor height of 10 ft (3.048 m) with
varying bay width (Figures 1a and 1b). The building has a reinforced concrete moment
resisting frame and two elevator shafts as shown in the figures. In addition to 10 stories,
the building has a small room having a height of 13 ft (3.962 m) to house the elevator
machinery on the roof. The building has two floors of basement assumed to behave as a
rigid body, which are not considered during the analysis. The basements and first floor
of the building are used for parking and the second and higher floors are used for
residential purposes. From the available data, the design compressive strength of the
concrete is 30 MPa and the nominal yield strength of reinforcement is 500 MPa. Dead
load consists of member self-weight, loads due to partitions, infill clay brick walls, and
floor finish. Live load on the floor and roof slabs were 2.0 kN/m2 and 1.5 kN/m2,
respectively. Total seismic weight of the building was 62,108 kN and the design base
shear in X- and Y- direction were 5,936.3 kN and 5,542.7 kN, respectively. The base
shear was calculated based on the provision of IS 1893:2002, which is extensively used
for the design of buildings in Nepal. The periods of the building for the first three modes
are 1.22 s, 1.20 s, 1.04 s.

3. FIELD INVESTIGATION

The field investigation of the building was conducted by the authors and the remaining
of seismic performance index R was obtained in the field, following the guidelines of The
Japan Building Disaster Prevention Association (2002). It is to be noted that this
calculation was done based on observations of the first floor only. The residual capacity
of the building was found to be 90% of the original strength, which suggests that the
superstructure had undergone some damage to its structural members at the first floor
level. The calculation sheets are shown in Figures 1b and 2. Schmidt hammer test of the
concrete was performed in the field and the compressive strength of the concrete was
found to be around 45 MPa but the design value was considered during the numerical
analysis.

New Technologies for Urban Safety of Mega Cities in Asia

 56.5 ft

Corner
Column

Elevator Shaft

85.75 ft
CM

Y X

(a) (b)

Figure 1: Ten-story RC building: (a) three-dimensional model (b) first floor plan. (Note:
Types of crack observed in structural elements of first floor during field
observation are shown).

Figure 2: Field observation sheet.

Performance of a ten-story reinforced concrete building damaged in the 2015 Nepal Gorkha
Earthquake
October 2015, Kathmandu, Nepal

4. MODELING OF THE BUILDING

Modeling and analysis of the building was done using SAP2000 V15 (CSI 2013). The
beams and columns were modeled using rectangular frame elements (rectangular
sections), while the core walls of the elevator shafts were modeled using a frame element
(box section) representing equivalent wall sections. Similar techniques have been
adopted in many studies to model shear walls (Rana et al. 2004, Rahman et al. 2012). To
maintain the connectivity of the walls with the frame, it was connected at the floor level
with rigid links. For all the beams and columns, a cracked section was assumed with an
effective stiffness equal to 50% of the gross section. In-plane rigidity of the floors was
considered by a rigid diaphragm action. The gravity loads from the infill walls and
staircase were applied to the beams, hence, explicit modeling of these components were
not conducted.

In order to model the nonlinear behavior in the structural components, nonlinear hinges
were assigned to each frame element. The default hinge properties available in SAP2000
which is based on FEMA 356 (FEMA 2000) is used. The PMM hinges that combine
axial force and biaxial bending (i.e. axial force-moment interaction) was assigned to both
ends in all the columns, while M3 hinges (representing the out-of-plane bending) were
assigned to the beam ends. For the walls, PMM hinges were applied only at the first floor
as plastic hinges are expected to be formed at the base level.

5. NUMERICAL ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

A three-dimensional model of the building was created and pushover analysis and
nonlinear response history analysis (NLRHA) under bidirectional seismic excitation were
performed. The ground motion considered for the NLRHA is the record of Kantipath
(KATNP) station in Kathmandu available from the USGS (USGS 2015) strong motion
center database. Time history plots of the records are shown in Figure 3. For the analysis,
the EW and NS components were applied in X- and Y-directions, respectively, while the
vertical component was not considered in this study. The PGA at the station was 0.158g,
and 0.164g in EW and NS directions, respectively, which is thought to be amplified at
other locations where heavy damage was observed. The building was re-analyzed using
the same ground motions with a scale factor of 1.5, hereafter referred as 1.5KATNP, to
investigate the behavior under the increased intensity.

5.1 Pushover analysis

Pushover analysis in the X- and Y-directions considering the P-delta effect was carried
out for the building using an inverted triangle load pattern (tri) and uniform load pattern
(uni). The pushover curve of the building is shown in Figure 4, where the base shear
coefficient V/W is plotted against the roof drift ratio. Here, V is the base shear force and
W is the seismic weight of the building. After the plastic hinge formation in the wall
elements were observed, a drop in the pushover curves can be seen as indicated in the
figure. The drop in the pushover curve corresponds to the point C shown in Figure 4.
Uniform load pattern resulted in larger base shear compared to that of inverted triangular
pattern.

New Technologies for Urban Safety of Mega Cities in Asia

 0.2 0.2

Acceleration (g)
Acceleration (g)
0.1 0.1
0.0 0.0
-0.1 -0.1
KATNP_EW KATNP_NS
-0.2 -0.2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
(a) Time (s) (b) Time (s)
Figure 3: Acceleration time history recorded at Kantipath station, Kathmandu: (a) EW-
direction and (b) NS- direction. (Source: http://www.strongmotioncenter.org/).
0.5
X-dir _tri
Base shear coefficient

0.4 Y-dri_tri
X-dir_uni
0.3 Y-dir_uni

Wall hinge reaches point C

0.2

0.1

Hinge deformation behavior

0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
Roof drift ratio
Figure 4: Pushover curves for the building.

5.2 Nonlinear response history analysis

Figure 5 presents the results for peak inter-story drift ratio, peak floor displacement, peak
normalized story shear force and peak absolute floor accelerations under KATNP ground
motion. Peak inter-story drift ratio, peak floor displacement, and peak absolute floor
accelerations are shown at the center of mass (CM) and one of the corner columns (see
Figure 1b for the location of CM and the corner column). Maximum inter-story drift ratio
along the height of the building is 1.0% at CM whereas it is about 1.15% at the corner
column (Figure 5a), signifying the effect of torsion in the building. Since, the building
was subjected to twisting action as observed in the numerical analysis, this could be a
reason for a few cracks in the walls and some columns that were observed during the field
investigation. The displacements for the CM and corner columns are shown in Figure 5b.
The floor displacements in X- and Y-directions at CM and corner column are nearly the
same. The maximum value of the normalized story shear force at the base in X-direction
is about 0.29W (Figure 5c). The base shear corresponding to the roof drift (obtained from
response history analysis) is well predicted when a uniform load pattern is considered
during the pushover analysis. Although the results from numerical analysis show the base
shear reaching its ultimate capacity, the field observation did not represent such a damage
state. This could be due to the ground motion considered, which is not scaled to represent
the site condition. Besides this, the strength of the concrete obtained by Schmidt hammer
test was about 1.5 times the value considered during the analysis and the modeling
assumptions where the basement was neglected and the boundary conditions considered
for the analysis could have led to such a large demand in the building. The acceleration
in the floor level varied from 0.15g at the base to a maximum value of about 0.3g at higher
floor levels (Figure 5d). There is only a slight variation in the value of peak floor
acceleration at the CM and the corner column.

Performance of a ten-story reinforced concrete building damaged in the 2015 Nepal Gorkha
Earthquake
October 2015, Kathmandu, Nepal

Under 1.5KATNP ground motion record, there was significant variation in the results of
inter-story drift ratio for X- and Y-direction as well as at CM and corner column (Figure
6a). Maximum inter-story drift ratio of the building in the X-direction increased up to
1.9% indicating that there can be severe damage in the building. The maximum
difference between the value of inter-story drift ratio between CM and corner column is
significant as seen in Figure 6a, signifying that the building could twist leading to failure
of the lateral load resisting system. The displacement in the X-direction at CM and corner
column increased significantly (Figure 6b) compared to the case of KATNP ground
motion. The base shear of the building reached about 0.45W indicating that the capacity
is exceeded and severe damage can occur. The peak floor acceleration in the Y-direction
increases drastically up to 0.7g for the corner column while it is about 0.45g in the X-
direction. At the CM, the acceleration at the base and roof for both the X- and Y-directions
are almost the same while some variations can be seen along the floor levels. The
distribution of acceleration along the floor indicates the higher mode effects in the
building.

10F 10F
9F CM_X-dir 9F
CM_Y-dir
8F Corner_X-dir 8F
7F Corner_Y-dir 7F
Floor level
Floor level

6F 6F
5F 5F
4F 4F
3F 3F CM_X-dir
CM_Y-dir
2F 2F Corner_X-dir
1F 1F Corner_Y-dir
Base Base
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0 100 200 300 400 500
(a) Inter-story drift ratio (%) (b) Floor displacement (mm)
10F 10F
X-dir CM_X-dir
9F 9F
Y-dir CM_Y-dir
8F 8F Corner_X-dir
7F Corner_Y-dir
Floor level

Floor level

7F
6F
6F
5F
5F
4F
3F 4F
2F 3F
1F 2F
Base 1F
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
(c) Normalized story shear force (d) Floor acceleration (g)

Figure 5: Peak response of superstructure under KATNP ground motion record: (a) inter-
story drift ratio, (b) floor displacement, (c) normalized story shear force, (d)
floor acceleration.

New Technologies for Urban Safety of Mega Cities in Asia

 10F 10F
CM_X-dir
9F CM_Y-dir 9F
8F Corner_X-dir 8F
Corner_Y-dir
7F 7F

Floor level

Floor level
6F 6F
5F 5F
4F 4F
3F 3F CM_X-dir
2F 2F CM_Y-dir
Corner_X-dir
1F 1F
Corner_Y-dir
Base Base
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0 100 200 300 400 500
(a) Inter-story drift ratio (%) (b) Floor displacement (mm)
10F 10F
X-dir CM_X-dir
9F Y-dir 9F
CM_Y-dir
8F 8F Corner_X-dir
7F Corner_Y-dir
Floor level

Floor level
7F
6F
6F
5F
5F
4F
4F
3F
2F 3F
1F 2F
Base 1F
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
(c) Normalized story shear force (d) Floor acceleration (g)
Figure 6: Peak response of superstructure under 1.5KATNP ground motion record: (a)
inter-story drift ratio, (b) floor displacement, (c) normalized story shear force,
(d) floor acceleration.

6. CONCLUSIONS

The seismic performance of a 10-story building which is typical type of high-rise RC

buildings constructed in Nepal is studied. The building is evaluated using nonlinear static
and nonlinear response history analysis. Based on the results of the nonlinear analysis,
the following conclusions can be drawn:

Although the base shear capacity of the building is significantly larger than the design
value, the earthquake induced base shear is large enough to cause damage. But the
damage observed in the field was very less which could be due to the site effect, use
of nominal strengths of concrete and steel rather than the expected values.
Torsional behavior of the building could be observed as there were notable differences
in the inter-story drift ratio at the CM and corner column, when the ground motion
without any scale factor was considered.
The maximum inter-story drift ratio of the building under the earthquake was 1.2%
and this value reached 1.9% when a scale factor of 1.5 for the ground motion was
used, indicating that the building may not be able to sustain higher seismic demands.
On increasing the scale factor of the ground motion record by 1.5, the displacement
in the X-direction increases drastically compared to that of the Y-direction.

Performance of a ten-story reinforced concrete building damaged in the 2015 Nepal Gorkha
Earthquake
October 2015, Kathmandu, Nepal

Hence, it can be stated that although the building is designed following the Indian
Standards, the resistance to seismic demands is inadequate. To enhance the performance
of the building, and to avoid torsional behavior the stiffness should be increased by adding
shear walls to the flexible side. The authors also recommend the use of instruments to
monitor the behavior of the buildings which can be the basis for the construction of new
buildings in the vicinity.

REFERENCES

Chaulagain, H., Rodrigues, H., Jara, J., Spacone, E., and Varum, H., 2013. Seismic
response of current RC buildings in Nepal: a comparative analysis of different
design/construction. Engineering Structures 49, 284-294.

CSI, 2013. SAP2000, Integrated Finite Element Analysis and Design of Structures,
Version 15, Computers and Structures Inc., Berkeley, CA.

FEMA 2000. Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings,
FEMA-356. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.

IS 13920:1993. Ductile detailing of reinforced concrete structures subjected to seismic

force code of practice, Bureau of Indian Standards, ManakBhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah
Zafar Marg, New Delhi.

IS 1893:2002. Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures, 5th revision, Bureau
of Indian Standards, ManakBhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah ZafarMarg, New Delhi.

Rahman, M. K., Ajmal, M., Baluch, M. H., and Celep, Z., 2012. Nonlinear static pushover
analysis of eight storey RC frame shear wall building in Saudi Arabia. 15th World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisboa, Portugal, Paper No. 4.

Rana, R., Jin, L., and Zekioglu, A., 2004. Pushover analysis of a 19 story concrete shear
wall building. 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, Canada
Paper No. 133.

The Japan Building Disaster Prevention Association, 2002. Guidelines for post-
earthquake damage evaluation and rehabilitation for buildings (in Japanese).

USGS, 2015. Source: http://www.strongmotioncenter.org/.

New Technologies for Urban Safety of Mega Cities in Asia