You are on page 1of 8

Seismic retrofitting of a garments factory

building in Bangladesh

Anup Kumar Halder1


1
B.Sc.Engg., Executive Engineer, Public Works Department,
Government of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh.
akhalder2000@yahoo.com
Akira Inoue2
2
M.Engg., OYO International Corporation, Japan
inoue@oyointer.com
Yosuke Nakajima3
3
B.Sc.Engg., ERS Corporation, Japan
nakajima@ers-co.jp
Md. Rafiqul Islam4
4
M.Engg., Executive Engineer, Public Works Department,
Government of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh
rafiq89bd@gmail.com

ABSTRACT

Seismic assessment and retrofitting methods are not properly addressed in Bangladesh
National Building Code (BNBC 1993 and draft of BNBC 2015), although they are
strongly needed. After the Rana Plaza collapse, owners of many garments factory
wanted technical assistance for structural evaluation of their factory buildings. Existing
Japanese seismic assessment and retrofitting method was applied to one such factory
building, DK Knitwear Ltd with necessary modifications considering local building
construction conditions and codal requirements. This Japanese method was selected for
simplicity of calculation. After seismic assessment, the selected four storied garments
building revealed deficiency in seismic performance in both directions at ground and
first floor level. Later retrofitting was done using steel frame bracing at Ground and
first floor level. The steel bracings were supported over R.C.C. shear wall at foundation
level. Application of the method showed improvement of the seismic behavior. This
paper shares the Bangladesh experience in retrofitting works.

Keywords: seismic assessment, reinforced concrete, existing building, retrofitting


design.

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

After the Rana Plaza collapse in 2013, JICA was keen to help garment factory owners
in Bangladesh by sanctioning very soft loans for retrofitting vulnerable R.C.C. factory
buildings. The two ongoing JICA funded projects with Government of Bangladesh
1)CNCRP- a technical co-operation project concerning seismic retrofitting techniques
with Public Works Department and 2) FSPDSME-a financial co-operation project with
Bangladesh Bank were engaged to support the factory owners. A lot of factory owners
showed interest to take the technical and financial help. To make a priority list for

Seismic Retrofitting of a garments factory buildings in Bangladesh


October 2015, Kathmandu, Nepal

immediate attention a simplified evaluation method proposed by Seki (2015) was used.
The simplified method was derived from existing Japanese seismic assessment and
retrofitting method taking into considerations of local construction conditions and
characteristics of buildings. The selected building is a four storied R.C.C frame
structure garments building with a floor area of 1811 m2. Its performance against
vertical loading was acceptable but performance under seismic loading was
questionable. After detailed evaluation it was found that, concrete core strength was
considerably lower than the design strength. As a result retrofitting was the ultimate
solution to ensure BNBC requirement.

2. JAPANESE SEISMIC EVALUATION METHOD

Japanese seismic evaluation method was used to evaluate a few existing R.C.C.
buildings in Bangladesh with some modification considering local seismicity and
building characteristics according to Manual for Seismic Retrofit Design of Existing
Reinforced Concrete Buildings draft version 2015. The method recognizes the strength
and ductility of a building, sequence of failure of less ductile to more ductile members.
The earthquake resisting capacity must be compared with an index to characterize the
earthquake damaging power (Otani, 2000). Generally, seismic Index of structure Is
shows its seismic performance level. There are three levels of seismic screening method
for seismic evaluation of a building. First level is preliminary method used only
geometric section ignoring the reinforcement contribution. Second level screening uses
detailed investigation where strong beam and weak column failure is considered. Third
level is more rigorous and requires tedious calculations. Seismic Evaluation using
second level is more appropriate for Bangladesh buildings where narrow column and
small volume of beam-column space is common. This will eventually result in failure of
column before beam failure which resembles fundamental assumption of second level
screening method and is appropriate for Bangladeshi buildings.

2.1 Methodology

The seismic index of structure Is shall be calculated by following equation which was
developed by The Japan Building Disaster Prevention Association in, 1997. It is
calculated at each story and in each principal horizontal direction of a building.

IS = E0 SD T (1)
Where: Eo= Basic seismic index of structure.
SD= Irregularity index.
T = Time index.

Seismic demand index of structure Iso, for a building is defined as a product of ES, Z, G
and U. Where ES, stands for basic seismic demand index of structure, Z for zone index,
G for ground index of soil and U is for usage pattern. Seismic index of structure Is is
compared with seismic demand index of structure Iso. If Is Iso then the seismic
performance of the building is satisfactory.

New Technologies for Urban Safety of Mega Cities in Asia


Strength
Index, C

Storey shear coefficient ( Story


CF = constant

shear force / building weight)


Strength
S X oriented Seismic
retrofit target zone

B Both Strength and Ductility


X
oriented retrofit
A X
X
D Ductility oriented
Existing buildings
retrofit

Story deflection angle (storey deflection/


Ductility Index, F storey height) or ductility factor

Figure 1: Strength index and Ductility index Figure 2: Load and Deflection Curves and
Concept of Retrofit

When it is not satisfied structural strengthening elements such as column


jacketing, R.C.C wing wall, R.C.C shear wall, steel brace frame and others are provided
so that Is after retrofit exceeds Iso. Is is proportional to CF [strength index (C) ductility
index (F)]. Strength and ductility is evaluated for each vertical member. Then CF
relation expressed by multi-linear lines a floor in each direction can be prepared through
the summation of all vertical members of that floor. In case of seismic evaluation and
retrofit design, simplified multi-linear lines express the performance of a building
shown in Figure 1. Vertical axis C and horizontal axis F is non-dimensional.

2.2 Seismic Retrofitting

The concept of retrofit design of an existing RC building is shown in Figure 2. Vertical


axis is horizontal strength at ground floor divided by building weight, which is base
shear coefficient. Horizontal axis is story deflection angle (ductility factor), which is
story deflection divided by story height. The curve A of the Figure 2 is a typical existing
R.C.C. building where strength and ductility is not enough. There are three retrofit
methods strength oriented (curve S), ductility oriented (curve D) and both strength and
ductility retrofit method (curve B). Right upper side of hyperbolic curve of the Figure is
expressed as Seismic target Zone. In case the curve of a building reaches the target
zone, it is judged that the building is acceptable.

2.3 Comparison of shear strength between BNBC and Japanese standard

In CNCRP project relationship between the codes was studied before applying the
Japanese standard for seismic evaluation and retrofitting for Bangladesh buildings. In
the study it was found that BNBC formula can be used to calculate shear strength where
following points need to be considered according to Manual for Seismic Assessment of
Existing Reinforced Concrete Buildings draft version 2015.
BNBC formula provides safer results compared to both experimental and
evaluation formula of Japan. On the contrary, in case of high axial force ration and low
strength of concrete it need to be careful for using BNBC formula because in some

Seismic Retrofitting of a garments factory buildings in Bangladesh


October 2015, Kathmandu, Nepal

cases it provides lesser value than the Japanese evaluation formula. Similarly, for high
shear reinforcement ration same cautions should be considered for applying BNBC.

3. EXAMPLE OF DK GARMENTS BUILDING RETROFITTING

The selected building was capable of carrying vertical load only according to the BNBC
1993. However, considering earthquake loading its performance was questionable.
Therefore, seismic performance was assessed following seismic assessment of Japanese
method and eventually retrofitting was done following Japanese method.

3.1 Description of the factory building

The building is a four story R.C.C garment factory constructed in 2002. One of the
characteristics of the building is the presence of a double height space at one side of the
building. The height of building at ground floor is large compared to other floors.

Table 1: Building Data


Name D.K Knit Wear Ltd.
Usage Garments Factory
Story 4
Building height 15,292mm
Story height 3,658mm(Typical)
4,878mm (GF to 1F)
Structural type R.C.C Framed
Structure
Foundation Individual footing
Building area 1,811m2
Total floor area 6,038.7m2
Year of design 2002 (approved)
Figure 3: Front view of D.K. Knit Wear Ltd

Figure 4: Framing plan of GF and Typical floor. Figure 5: Framing plan of 1st Floor of the building.

New Technologies for Urban Safety of Mega Cities in Asia


3.2 Structural Assessment

Concrete strength, Fc=10.7N/mm2 and re-bar yield strength 400kN/mm2 was found
according to test report of cores and sample re-bars which were collected from site.
Proposed seismic demand index of structure, Iso= 0.30 is selected for buildings of Dhaka
considering importance factor =1, according to Manual for Seismic Retrofit Design of
Existing Reinforced Concrete Buildings draft version 2015.
The strength and deformation capacities of structural members are calculated on the
basis of structural dimensions and material properties investigated at site. Ductility
index, F=1.50(=1/100) is calculated at ground floor level for most of the columns
manually considering structural data. In this evaluation, F = 1.27(=1/150) at ground
floor level was used due to high axial force ratio. This conservative adjustment will
reduce the damage of brick walls and non-structural elements. During the assessment
irregularity index SD is found 0.76 at GF for both direction (X and Y direction), which
is relatively large. Time Index, T is estimated following standard table, and T = 1.0 is
used for further calculation. Result of seismic evaluation shows Is value at level 1 and
level 2 are lower than Iso (= 0.30) which suggests for retrofitting. Calculated F is higher
than 1.5 at level 3 and level 4, but F =1.5 was used for assessment considering low
strength concrete according to Japan Concrete Institute in February 2009.

Table 2: Result of Seismic Evaluation


Story (n+1) / X- direction Y- direction
(n+i) C F Eo Is C F Eo Is
4 0.63 0.63 1.50 0.59 0.56 0.59 1.50 0.56 0.53
3 0.71 0.33 1.50 0.35 0.33 0.32 1.50 0.34 0.33
2 0.83 0.18 1.27 0.19 0.18 0.16 1.27 0.17 0.15
1 1.00 0.12 1.27 0.15 0.11 0.10 1.27 0.16 0.12

3.3 Retrofit design

Retrofit elements are provided at outside of perimeter column. This will reduce
disturbances during execution of construction work and production will go on smoothly.
Among the different retrofitting options steel framed brace is preferred which will allow
windows and other openings of perimeter walls to function properly. However, in-filled
R.C.C. walls are provided under the steel framed brace up to the existing foundation
footing to transfer the strength of steel framed brace at GF. It contributed for the
improvement irregularity both in plan and vertical direction. Required number of steel
framed brace can be calculated by following standard equations.

Table 3: Required numbers of Steel Framed Brace


Required
Design shear
W, Design shear strength Q, additional
Story coefficient,
Weight n+i after retrofit, Original strength, strength,
n+i 0.30
(kN), Un n +1 n+i 0.30 C (at F) Wi, (2) Q
n + 1 F 0.95 1.0 W
factored n + 1 F 0.95 1.0 i (1)- (2)
Iso = 0.30, SD = 0.95 (kN)
load (after retrofit) (1)
Q (kN) C Q(kN)
4 15,065 1.6 0.33 (F =1.5) 5,077 in case F =1.5 x 9,481 0.63 ---

Seismic Retrofitting of a garments factory buildings in Bangladesh


October 2015, Kathmandu, Nepal

y 8,955 0.59 ---


x 10,892 0.32 ---
3 33,178 1.4 0.29 (F =1.5) 9,788 in case F =1.5
y 10,646 0.32 ---
x 9,512 0.18 5,925
2 51,803 1.2 0.29 (F =1.27) 15,437
y 8,606 0.16 6,831
x 7,909 0.12 8,622
1 66,391 1.0 0.24 (F =1.27) 16,531
y 7,013 0.11 9,518

Following combination of steel framed brace is proposed. Well balanced layout of steel
brace is planned to improve the irregularity. Irregularity index of each floor is 0.95. In
X-direction four numbers of steel frame bracing at GF and four numbers at 1st floor is
required. Similarly, in Y-direction four numbers at GF and four numbers at 1st floor is
suggested.

Figure 6: Retrofitting plan at GF Figure 7: Retrofitting plan at 1st Foor

Figure 8: Typical sectional elevation of a retrofitted frame.

New Technologies for Urban Safety of Mega Cities in Asia


4. RESULT OF SEISMIC RETROFIT DESIGN

Seismic index of structure, Is at level 1 and level 2 are more than Iso (= 0.30) and are
satisfactory. Irregularity Index, SD2, is 0.95 after retrofit

Table 4: Result after Retrofit


n +1 X-direction Y-direction
Story
n+i C F Eo Is C F Eo Is
4 0.63 0.62 1.50 0.59 0.56 0.57 1.50 0.56 0.53
3 0.71 0.32 1.50 0.34 0.32 0.32 1.50 0.34 0.32

2 0.83 0.14 + 0.17 = 0.32 1.27 0.34 0.32 0.16 + 0.14 = 0.30 1.27 0.32 0.30
1 1.0 0.12 + 0.16 = 0.28 1.27 0.35 0.33 0.11 + 0.14 = 0.25 1.27 0.32 0.30

Figure 9 indicates the performance after retrofitting 1st floor X-direction. The X axis
indicates the F (ductility index) and the Y axis C (strength index). C (strength index) F
(ductility index) relation at each floor before and after retrofit can be shown in similar
way. Right upper side of the hyperbolic curve shows the target area of seismic
performance. Before retrofit the performance remains below the line and after retrofit
the performance line matches with the line ensuring building performance. This
hyperbolic curve shows target Eo or Iso expressed by,
n+i I So
CF = (2)
n +1 SD T
Where Iso=0.3, SD=0.95 and T=1.0.

Figure 9: Performance of Building after retrofit (1st floor X direction)

5. CONCLUSION

The application of Japanese method can be used for the buildings of Bangladesh.
However, reliability of the procedure needs to be examined with respect to the damage
in buildings (Otani, 2000). This can be achieved by scale down model test in simulator

Seismic Retrofitting of a garments factory buildings in Bangladesh


October 2015, Kathmandu, Nepal

or other suitable methods as Bangladesh does not have ample earthquake damage data
of buildings. In this regard new research should be encouraged to come up with
appropriate solutions considering Bangladesh building characteristics and availability of
local construction materials.

6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors gratefully acknowledge JICA Bangladesh for their continuous support to
build safer cities in Bangladesh through technology transfer and fund for retrofitting
projects. All the CNCRP members involved in this project, Bangladesh Bank and DK
authority deserve heartiest thanks for their co-operation during the execution of the
work.

REFERENCES

The Japan Building Disaster Prevention Association, 1997, Standard for Seismic
capacity Assessment of Existing Reinforced Concrete Buildings(in Japanese).
The Japan Building Disaster Prevention Association, 2001, Standard for Seismic
Evaluation of Existing Reinforced Concrete Buildings, Japan.
The Japan Building Disaster Prevention Association, 2001, Guidelines for Seismic
Retrofit of Existing Reinforced Concrete Buildings, Japan.
The Japan Building Disaster Prevention Association, 2001, Technical Manual for
Seismic Evaluation and Seismic Retrofit of Existing Reinforced Concrete Building.
Housing and Building Research Institute (HBRI) & Bangladesh Standards and Testing
Institution (BSTl), 1993. Bangladesh National Building Code (BNBC), Dhaka,
Bangladesh.
Housing and Building Research Institute (HBRI) & Bangladesh Standards and Testing
Institution (BSTl), 2015. Draft final of Bangladesh National Building (BNBC), Dhaka,
Bangladesh.
Public Works Department, 2015, Draft version Public Works Department, Manual for
Seismic Retrofit Design of Existing Reinforced Concrete Buildings unpublished, Dhaka,
Bangladesh.
Public Works Department, 2015, Draft version Public Works Department, Manual for
Seismic Assessment of Existing Reinforced Concrete Buildings unpublished, Dhaka,
Bangladesh.
Seki, M., 2015, Proposal on the Simplified Structural Evaluation Method for Existing
Reinforced Concrete Buildings based on the Japanese Seismic Evaluation Standard vis-
a vis the International Seismic Code, Journal of Earthquake Science and Engineering,
Publisher ISES 2015.http://www.joes.org.in.
Otani, S.,2000, Seismic Vulnerability Assessment Methods for Buildings in Japan,
Earthquake Engineering Seismology Volume 2, Number 2, September 2000, pp.47-56.

New Technologies for Urban Safety of Mega Cities in Asia

You might also like