Report

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
This project describes the seismic assessment of the Alauddin Khilji Tomb in Delhi, India was
built in memory of Alauddin Khilji. The seismic history of the city is indication of the risk that
historical constructions are subjected to. Based on the Indian Seismic code (IS, 2005), Delhi is
in the Indian seismic zone IV, which is considered to have severe seismic force.
It is a big concern in India that, there is no specified code for seismic retrofit for historical
buildings and structures in India. And there is not even a code to guide such type of retrofit.
Cause due the effect of destructive nature like air pollution, vibration due to traffic, settlement
of soil and due to earthquake, etc and as we know that most of the historical building never
undergo continuous maintenance or not even maintenance at all. Due to which large number
of historic structure and buildings are under risk of sudden collapse and which may lead to
human life at a huge risk. Because of this situation, from last recent years huge investment is
being done for inspecting the old historic building/structure, testing them such as mainly
nondestructive testing, start monitoring and in retrofitting them also.
Due to the movement of the seismic plate under earth crust, development of earthquake
happens. And if the structure/building is not designed for the resistant of that earthquake
force, it may lead to structural damage or it may even collapse suddenly which may lead to
human life at risk. Our India is a country which is very rich in architectural historic structure
and buildings which represent our history and earthquake may result in the structural damage
of these structure and building and may also collapse even, due to which our history of India
may lost forever. So, it is also a big concern in India to be handled.
That is some of the historic heritage buildings are gone into dust every year which may lead to
our history lost forever due to earthquake because these buildings are not designed for
earthquake situation. And these buildings are very old and due to no maintenance at all which
may lead to endanger the life of the historic structure.
Therefore, to conserve our history, people from many discipline come together to tackle this
situation and hence to safeguard our monumental and historical buildings and structures.
These historic building when built, they were not designed to handle earthquake force and
therefore these building are in huge risk due to seismic actions.
Thus, the initial general step which is required analyzing the structure are given below.
a. Architectural different types of drawing of the selected structure.
b. The soil investigation report on which the structure is constructed.
c. The location city of the structure to determine in which earthquake prone zone the
structure is lying.
So, in this project we are selecting the site, analyzing it and determining whether the selected
historic structure is needed to be retrofitted or not. Hence, we are helping and contributing in
protecting and to save the Indian cultural heritage.
1
1.1 Scope and Objective of the project
 The aim of this project is to Retrofit historical structure Alauddin Khilji Tomb.
 Structure is considered to be located in Seismic zone IV as per IS 1893:2002.
 Structure will be design as a Load bearing structure.
1.2 Methodology used.
 Planning and designing the structure.
 Finding the various load on building i.e. Dead load, Live Load and earthquake load as per
IS code .
 Analyzing the buildings using STADPRO or any other available software.
 Finding the most efficient section for Retrofitting.
1.3 Earthquake Resistant Low Rise Building.
A low-rise is a building that is only a few stories tall. Emporis Gmbh (Hamburg Germany)
defines a low-rise as “an enclosed structure below 35 meters [115 feet] which is divided into
regular floor levels” .The Alauddin khilji tomb is a low rise as a building below 3 stores.
Earthquake-resistant structures are designed and constructed to withstand various types of
hazardous earthquake exposures at the sites of their particular location. According to building
code, earthquake-resistant structures are intended to withstand the largest earthquake of a
certain probability that is likely to occur at their location.
2
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
1) A. Sheth, R. D. Chaudhari, E. khan, D. Gupta and M.Saini, " Seismic retrofitting of

manimandir complex at morbi, Gujarat, India "[13th world confrence on eathquake
engineering], August 2006, paper no. 2430.
The manimandir complex whose plan area is 100m × 100m which is very popular mandir in
morbi which is situated in western Gujarat, India. And it is suffering from huge damage due to
earthquake happen in the year 2001 in that area. Due to which, Gujarat government is working
to reconstruct or retrofitting of that complex. This reconstruction work is majorly divided into
design and execution of work; in this paper we are discussing the design and execution of that
project. Basically we are analyzing the drawings and survey. The model of the complex is
made in finite element and analyzes real structure before and after retrofitting. After analyzing
the structure, we detect which part of the complex are weak and need to be retrofitted or
repaired like its slab, arches, elevated part, walls, etc. and the make the structure strengthen
more against seismic action. And we make an effort reduce the cost of retrofitting to make the
project economical. After this, the actual execution of the planning is the major challenge.
2) T. Wenk and K. Beyer," Seismic conservation strategies for cultural heritage buildings in
Switzerland:" [European confrence on Earthquake engineering and seismology], August 2014,
page no. 25-29.
As we all know, old buildings or cultural heritage structure are not constructed keep in mind
of seismic action and therefore these old structures are in high risk due to seismic action or
earthquake. In this paper we are discussing how to deal with this situation i.e., make heritage
structure safer against seismic action in Switzerland. And giving the new concept to
retrofitting these heritage structures economically and make these structure safe so that human
can enter without the feeling of danger of risk of their life. And after retrofitting, we need to
increase this heritage structure life at least till 50 years. And basically we are retrofitting these
heritage structures so that history remains preserved as far as possible. Basically we need to
strengthen these heritage building against seismic action and these code for seismic action for
3
heritage structure are entirely different from the code of seismic action for the now a days
building. Therefore, we should not follow these building codes in heritage structures.
3) P. B. Lourenço, P. Roca, C. Modena and D. V. Oliveira," Reducing the seismic vulnerability

of cultural heritage building ".
Cultural heritage building subjected to seismic action, pollution, soil settlement from long
time due to which these buildings needs to be retrofitted or be under continuous maintenance
for the safety of human life and to preserve the history as far as possible. In last recent years,
all over the world large investment are made in inspecting these structures, performing
nondestructive testing, monitoring and retrofitting some of the unsafe heritage structures. As
earthquake is the major source of damaging of these historical structures, therefore in this
paper they have main focus to safe guard these structures against seismic action. Main focus
nowadays is to discover new technique and efficient technique to save guard against
vibrations of the structure due to seismic action. For that many researches are being done and
going on also so that we can safe are historical structure for a long time and human can see
that structure without feel of risk of their life and world history remain intact for a long time.
4) T.S. Brar, M.A. Kamal and R.K. Jain," Seismic Retrofitting of heritage buildings:" [ISET],
October 2012, Page No. D024
India is the largest country in South Asia with rich heritage structure. Due to earthquakes most
of the structures getting damaged and collapsing. To save our historic structures and To show
our Architecture to our future generations we started retrofitting the structures. If once they
lost our part of history is lost. There are various methods in the world that how to Retrofit the
structure and save our Architecture. There are various methods such as bracing parapets, tying
buildings to foundations and anchoring brick walls at highest, or roof level are been highly
effective. All the structure can be seismically upgraded by cost effective manner. We need
multi disciplined team To execute the retrofitting work.
5) M. ziyaeifar1, H. Meshki and M. Rajaei, " Rehabilitation of historical buildings subjected

to seismic hazards: " A methodology", [13th world confrence on Earthquake engineering],
August 2004, paper no. 1958.
4
Because of natural disasters, we are losing our historical structure. The only thing we can do is
safeguarding with seismic hazards. Survival of heritage structure from earthquake is very big
concern. Through this monuments caused decisive consensus on whether an action can be
taken to save treasures. It had caused due to common values of AAA values and seismic risk
reduction on buildings for particular techniques. In this study a technique of rehabilating any
particular historical building by weighing and comparing based on risk reduced and added
value on predictable costs. The proposed methodology on weighing coefficient is a rational
process defining different disciplines contributing for retrofitting a building. Not to new but
former reforming techniques which fit for better action for new ideas with minimal defects to
forts. Thus preserving these buildings which are transparent in Retrofit seismic to provide
particular forts. Valuable blocks that rehabilated plans for no Retrofit options which is
commonly favorite soluble for new costly constructible buildings.
5
CHAPTER 3
ANALYSIS OF THE STRUCTURE
Assumed that there are three structures, each at 2 m away from each other. The first structure
is of length 10 m and width 7.5 m. the second structure is of length 10m and width 9m. the
third structure is of same dimension as of structure 1. the height of each structure is 6m. wall
of each structure is of thickness of 750mm. wall of structure is made up of material silt stone.
The calculation of stiffness, angular frequency and time period for all the structure have been
done. the modulus of elasticity is 24 x N/ . The structure is considered to be in zone
IV.
Fig-3.1: Plan and elevation of 1st structure.
Fig-3.2: Plan and elevation of the 2nd structure.
6
3.1 Time period for structure 1:
The roof is distorted of structure so roof weight is not consider in all structure.
volume of wall is = (area under outer wall - area under inner wall) x height of structure
= [10x7.5-(10- 2x0.750)(7.5 - 2x0.750)] x 6
= 24x6
= 144
mass of wall = V x ρ
= 144 x 1400
= 201600 kg
case 1:
Moment of inertia(I) =
= 0.351
Stiffness (k) =
= =
= 466.66 x N/m
7
Angular frequency( )= = = 48.10 rad/sec
Time period = = = 0.130 sec
case 2:
= 62.5
Stiffness (k) =
= =
=8.33 x N/m
Time period = = = 9.76 x sec
3.2 Time period for structure 2:
8
The roof is distorted of structure so roof weight is not consider in all structure.
volume of wall is = (area under outer wall - area under inner wall) x height of structure
= [10x9 - (10- 2x0.750)(9 - 2x0.750)] x 6
= 43.25x6
= 259.5
mass of wall = V x ρ
= 259.5 x 1400
= 363300 kg
case 1
= 0.351
Stiffness (k) =
= =
= 466.66 x N/m
9
Time period = = = 0.175 sec
case 2
= 45.562
Stiffness (k) =
= =
=6.074 x N/m
Time period = = = 4.875 x sec
3.2 Aim of retrofitting.
The aim of retrofit is achievement of an acceptable probability that structures being designed
shall, with an appropriate degree of safety –
10
 Perform satisfactorily during their intended life.
 Sustain all loads and deformations of normal construction & use
 Have adequate durability
 Have adequate resistance to the effects of misuse and fire.
The condition of alauddin khilji tomb has been shown in Fig. 3.3
Fig 3.3: Roof of alauddiu khilji tomb.
.CHAPTER 4
11
STRESS ANALYSIS FOR LATERAL LOAD WITH AND WITHOUT
OPENTING
4.1 Model of the structure.
Structure 1:
Structure of dimension Length = 10m, Width = 7.5m, and height = 6m has been created in
Staad-Pro. Frame structure which is made in staad pro has been shown in Fig. 4.1. Front view
of 3-D model of structure has been shown in Fig. 4.2. Side view of 3-D model of structure has
been shown in Fig. 4.3.
Fig 4.1: Frame structure in Staad-pro.
Fig 4.2: Front view of 3d model.
12
Fig 4.3: Side view of 3d model in Staad pro.
The base of structure is kept fixed jointed the cross section of beams and columns are
750mmx750mm. The material of beam and column is silt stone. Wall thickness is not
considered in this structure. Earthquake loading has been applied from one side of structure
along its length. Nodal load is 0.36 times the mass of the structure. In this we have taken so
many cases of a plain earthquake load starting from 111.32 and incrimination of 10 percent
has been increased up to 70 percent. The deflection at the opposite end has been noted down
for each cases. The deflection vs load graph has been plotted for each and every case which is
shown below graph.
4.2 Load vs Deflection readings and graph.
For different value of earthquake resistant load deflection of structure at opposite

corner have been noted down. The value of load and deflection has been shown
in Table 4.1. From the corresponding values of loads and deflection graph have
been made for the structure which is shown in Fig. 4.4. The load is 0.36 time the
mass of structure. the load is kept increases by 10 percent and deflection at other
end has been noted. the load is increase till 70 percent earthquake resistant load.
Deflection and bending moment of structure are shown in Fig. 4.5.
13
Table 4.1: Load and deflection
S.NO LOAD DEFLECTION
1 111.32 26.746
2 122.45 29.47
3 134.64 32.403
4 148.1 35.644
5 155.84 37.504
6 166.98 40.187
7 178.11 1658.32
8 189.24 1766.95
Thus, the load vs deflection graph is as shown in the Fig..
Fig 4.4: Load vs deflection graph.
14
(a) (b)
Fig 4.5: (a)Deflection in structure, (b) Bending moment. in structure
4.3 Case 1: Without opening in the structure
The foundation of structure is kept fixed jointed the cross section of beams and columns are
750mmx750mm. The thickness of wall is 0.75 mm The material used in beam, column and
wall is made up of silt stone.
4.3.1 Structure 1
The force of 100KN has been applied to the structure keeping the cross section of all wall
750mm. the analysis of the plate has been done. the absolute stress, Maximum top
stress(principal major stress), minimum top stress(principal minor stress), maximum von mis
result has been noted down.
15
(a) Max Absolute stress.
(a) (b)
Fig 4.6: (a) Max absolute stresses in plate, (b) Max absolute stresses in structure 1.
From the result of maximum absolute stress in the structure we can conclude that absolute
stress is maximum at the centre of the wall but the load is applied tengentially so stress should
be maximum at the opposite end but results shows at minimum and it is gradually decreasing
at towords the corner.For the roof the stress is maximum at the point of implication of load
and it recreases gradually towords the other end. Max absolute stresses in plate and Max absolute
stresses in structure 1 has been shown in Fig. 4.6.
16
(b) Max top stress (Principal major stress).
(a) (b)
Fig 4.7:(a) Max top stress (Principal major stress) in plate, (b) max top stress (Principal major
stress).in structure 1.
From the result of Maximum top stress in the structure we can conclude that maximum top
stress is higher at the centre of the side wall but the load is applied tangentially so the stress
should be maximum at opposite end but results shows minimum and it is gradually decreasing
towards the centre. At the top of the roof stress is minimum at the center and gradually
increases towards the corner. Max top stress (Principal major stress) in plate and max top stress
(Principal major stress).in structure 1has been shown in Fig. 4.7.
17
(c) Minimum top stress (principal minor stress).
(a) (b)
Fig 4.8: (a) Min top stress (Principal minor stress) in plate, (b) Min top stress (Principal minor
From the result of minimum top stress in the structure we can conclude that principal minor
stress is maximum at the centre of the wall but the load is applied tangentially so stress should
be maximum at the opposite end but the results shows at minimum and it is gradually
decreasing towards the centre. It is higher at the centre and decreasing towards the corner. Min
top stress (Principal minor stress) in plate and Min top stress (Principal minor stress).in structure has
18
(d) Max von mis.
(a) (b)
Fig 4.9: Max top von mis stress in plate and max von mis stress.in structure 1.
From the result of maximum von mis stress in the structure we can conclude that von mis
stress is maximum at the centre of the wall but the load is applied tangentially so the stress
should be maximum at the opposite side but result shows at minimum and it is gradually
decreasing at towards the corner. from the side wall the von mis is maximum at the centre and
gradually decreasing towards the corner and for the roof it is minimum at the centre and
increasing towards the edges. Max top von mis stress in plate and max von mis stress.in structure 1
has been shown in Fig. 4.9.
19
4.3.2 Structure 2:
The force of 200 KN has been applied to the structure keeping the cross section of all wall
750mm. the analysis of the plate has been done. the absolute stress, Maximum top
stress(principal major stress), minimum top stress(principal minor stress), maximum von mis
result has been noted down.
(a) Max absolute stress
(a) (b)
Fig 4.10: Max absolute stresses in plate and max absolute stresses in structure 2.
and it recreases gradually towords the other end. Max absolute stresses in plate and max absolute
stresses in structure 2 has been shown in Fig. 4.10.
20
(b) Max top Stress (Principal major stress).
(a) (b)
Fig 4.11: (a) Max top stress (Principal major stress) in plate, (b) Max top stress (Principal
major stress).in structure 2.
towards the centre. At the top of the roof stress is minimum at the centre and gradually
increase towards the corner. Max top stress (Principal major stress) in plate and max top stress
(Principal major stress).in structure 2 has been shown in fig. 4.11.
21
(c) Minimum top stress (Principal minor stress).
(a) (b)
Fig 4.12: (a) Min top stress (Principal minor stress) in plate, (b) Min top stress (Principal
minor stress).in structure 2.
decreasing towards the centre. it is higher at the centre and decreasing towards the corner. Min
top stress (Principal minor stress) in plate and min top stress (Principal minor stress).in structure 2 has
been shown in Fig. 4.12..
22
(d) Max von mis.
(a) (c)
decreasing at towards the corner. From the side wall the von mis is maximum at the centre and
has been shown inFig. 4.13.
23
4.3.3 Structure 3:
The force of 100KN has been applied to the structure keeping the cross section of opposite
wall 500 mm.the thickness of remaining wall kept 750mm. the analysis of the plate has been
done. the absolute stress, Maximum top stress(principal majour stress), minimum top
stress(principal minor stress), maximum von mis result has been noted down.
(a) Max Absolute.
(a) (b)
Fig 4.14: Max absolute stresses in plate and max absolute stresses in structure 3.
stresses in structure 3has been shown in Fig 4.14
24
(a) (b)
Fig 4.15: (a) Max top stress (Principal major stress) in plate, (b) Max top stress (Principal
major stress).in structure 3.
increase towards the corner. : Max top stress (Principal major stress) in plate and max top stress
(Principal major stress).in structure 3 has been shown inFig. 4.15..
25
(c) Min Top (Principal minor stress).
(a) (b)
Fig 4.16: (a) Min top stress (Principal minor stress) in plate, (b) Min top stress (Principal
minor stress).in structure 3.
decreasing towards the centre. it is higher at the centre and decreasing towards the corner.
26
(d) Max von mis.
(a) (b)
decreasing at towards the corner. from the side wall the von mis is maximum at the centre and
has beem=n shown in Fig 4.17.
27
4.3.4 Structure 4:
The force of 200 KN has been applied to the structure keeping the cross section of opposite
wall 500mm, thickness of other wall kept 750mm. the analysis of the plate has been done. the
absolute stress, Maximum top stress(principal major stress), minimum top stress(principal
minor stress), maximum von mis result has been noted down.
(a) Max absolute stress.
(a) (b)
Fig 4.18:(a) Max absolute stresses in plate, (b) Max absolute stresses in structure 4.
stresses in structure 4has been shown in Fig 4.18.
28
(a) (b)
Fig 4.19: Max top stress (Principal major stress) in plate and max top stress (Principal major
increase towards the corner. : Max top stress (Principal major stress) in plate and max top stress
(Principal major stress).in structure 4 has been shown in Fig. 4.19.
29
(c) Minimum top stress (Principal minor Strss).
(a) (b)
Fig 4.20: Min top stress (Principal minor stress) in plate and min top stress (Principal minor
decreasing towards the centre. it is higher at the centre and decreasing towards the corner. Min
top stress (Principal minor stress) in plate and min top stress (Principal minor stress).in structure 4has
30
(d) Von mis top.
(a) (b)
Fig 4.21: (a) Max top von mis stress in plate, (b) Max von mis stress.in structure 4.
decreasing at towards the corner. From the side wall the von mis is maximum at the centre and
has been shown in Fig. 4.21..
31
4.4 Analysis with opening
In this different structure have been made with a surface opening in one surface. opening is of
dimension of 2.5m x 3m.diffrent cases of implication of load has been taken in this.
4.4.1 Structure 5
Fig.4.22 Frame model of structure 5
For the structure load of 100 KN have been applied perpendicular to wall surface. two forces
at the top corners of the wall. and pair of forces at the top corner of door opening are applied.
The cross section of columns, beams and surfaces are kept as 750 mm .The base of structure
kept fixed. Frame model of structure 5 has been shown in Fig. 4.22. 3D model of structure
5has been shown in Fig. 4.23.
Fig.4.23. 3D model of structure 5
32
(a) Max absolute stress
(a) (b)
Fig. 4.24 Max absolute stresses in plate and max absolute stresses in structure 5 .
stress is maximum at the bottom of the structure but the load is applied perpendicular to the
surface then the stress should be maximum at the bottom which it is correctly showing the
stress is minimum at the opposite edge which should also be maximum. the stress is not
linearly varying. Max absolute stresses in plate and max absolute stresses in structure 5 has been
shown in Fig. 4.24.
33
b) Maximum Top:
(a) (b)
Fig. 4.25 (a) Max top stress (Principal major stress) in plate, (b) Max top stress (Principal major
From the result of maximum Top stress in the structure we can conclude that maximum top
surface at the top corner and gate opening corner. the stress is gradually increasing from the
top towards bottom for the roof it is non uniformly increasing from corners to the centre till
the other end. At the gate opening also the force is minimum. for the side walls the stresses are
decreasing from top to bottom. Max top stress (Principal major stress) in plate and max top
stress (Principal major stress).in structure 5 has been shown in Fig. 4.25..
34
(c) Minimum Top Stress:
(a) (b)
Fig. 4.26 Min top stress (Principal minor stress) in plate and min top stress (Principal minor stress).in
structure 5.
From the result of minimum Top stress in the structure we can conclude that principal minor
stress is maximum at the top of the structure but the load is applied perpendicular to the
surface at the top corner and gate opening corner. From the result of minimum Top stress in
the structure we can conclude that minimum top stress is maximum at the bottom of the
structure but the load is applied perpendicular to the surface at the top corner and gate opening
corner. Min top stress (Principal minor stress) in plate and min top stress (Principal minor
stress).in structure 5 has been shown in Fig. 4.25.
35
(d)Max Von Mis stress:
(a) (b)
Fig. 4.27 Max top von mis stress in plate, (b) Max von mis stress.in structure 5
surface at the top corner and gate opening corner. For the roof of von mis stresses are
maximum at the corner where the load has been applied and it is non uniformly decreasing
towords the other corner.for the side wall von mis the stresses are maximum at the bottom and
it is gradually decreasing. In wall of gate opening surface von mis is maximum at the position
of loadand it is gradually decreasing. Max top von mis stress in plate and max von mis
stress.in structure 5has been shown in Fig. 4.27.
36
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION
Various types structure for the retrofitting of historical structure have been carried out. for
each type of structure different type of Earthquake resistance oading condition have been
taken. Load vs deflection curve have been made for simple structure to get relation of load
and deflection. Different type of analysis of stress have been done in these structure such as
Max absolute stress, Min top stress, Max top stress and Max von mis stress have been carried
out. The result shows that stresses is maximum at base of structure and minimum at the
opposite end. Earthquake resistance loading have been applied to know if earthquake come
how much load will sustain by the structure. Since delhi is in Zone 4 for earthquake. So
structure should be resistive toward earthquake load.
37
CHAPTER 6
REFERENCES
1. IS: 1893 -2002, Indian standard criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures
(fifth revision), Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
2. A. Sheth, R. D. Chaudhari, E. khan, D. Gupta and M.Saini, " Seismic retrofitting of
manimandir complex at morbi, Gujarat, India "[13th world confrence on eathquake
3. T. Wenk and K. Beyer," Seismic conservation strategies for cultural heritage buildings
in Switzerland:" [European confrence on Earthquake engineering and seismology],
August 2014, page no. 25-29.
4. P. B. Lourenço, P. Roca, C. Modena and D. V. Oliveira," Reducing the seismic

vulnerability of cultural heritage building ".
5. T.S. Brar, M.A. Kamal and R.K. Jain," Seismic Retrofitting of heritage buildings:"
[ISET], October 2012, Page No. D024
6. M. ziyaeifar1, H. Meshki and M. Rajaei, " Rehabilitation of historical buildings

subjected to seismic hazards: " A methodology", [13th world confrence on Earthquake
7. Pena F, Lourenco P. B. ," Sesmic assessment of qutbminar in Delhi, India", [world

confrence on earthquake engineering], October 2018, Page no. 12-17.
8. Fusco edoardo, Penna Anderea, Prota Andrea & Manfredi Gaetano, " esmic assesment
of historical natural stone masonary building through nonlinear analysis", [world
confrence of earthquake engineering], October 2008, Page no. 12-18.
9. STAAD.Pro V8i SS6
38

Report

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Report

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

CHAPTER 1

1) A. Sheth, R. D. Chaudhari, E. khan, D. Gupta and M.Saini, " Seismic retrofitting of

3) P. B. Lourenço, P. Roca, C. Modena and D. V. Oliveira," Reducing the seismic vulnerability

5) M. ziyaeifar1, H. Meshki and M. Rajaei, " Rehabilitation of historical buildings subjected

ANALYSIS OF THE STRUCTURE

Fig-3.1: Plan and elevation of 1st structure.

Fig-3.2: Plan and elevation of the 2nd structure.

= [10x7.5-(10- 2x0.750)(7.5 - 2x0.750)] x 6

Time period = = = 0.130 sec

Angular frequency( )= = = 642.9 rad/sec

Time period = = = 9.76 x sec

3.2 Time period for structure 2:

= [10x9 - (10- 2x0.750)(9 - 2x0.750)] x 6

Angular frequency( )= = = 35.839 rad/sec

Angular frequency( )= = = 1293.65 rad/sec

Time period = = = 4.875 x sec

3.2 Aim of retrofitting.

Fig 3.3: Roof of alauddiu khilji tomb.

4.1 Model of the structure.

Fig 4.1: Frame structure in Staad-pro.

Fig 4.2: Front view of 3d model.

4.2 Load vs Deflection readings and graph.

For different value of earthquake resistant load deflection of structure at opposite

S.NO LOAD DEFLECTION

Thus, the load vs deflection graph is as shown in the Fig..

Fig 4.4: Load vs deflection graph.

Fig 4.5: (a)Deflection in structure, (b) Bending moment. in structure

4.3 Case 1: Without opening in the structure

(a) Max absolute stress

(a) Max Absolute.

(a) Max absolute stress.

Fig.4.22 Frame model of structure 5

Fig.4.23. 3D model of structure 5

4. P. B. Lourenço, P. Roca, C. Modena and D. V. Oliveira," Reducing the seismic

6. M. ziyaeifar1, H. Meshki and M. Rajaei, " Rehabilitation of historical buildings

7. Pena F, Lourenco P. B. ," Sesmic assessment of qutbminar in Delhi, India", [world

9. STAAD.Pro V8i SS6

S-ar putea să vă placă și