Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
Last revision Both sides next revision
whe_example_nicaragua [2017/03/27 15:54]
Catalina Yepes [4. Earthquakes]
whe_example_nicaragua [2017/03/27 16:45]
Catalina Yepes [5. Earthquakes]
Line 101: Line 101:
 | Other |  |  |  | Other |  |  |
  
 +----
  
 === Design Process === === Design Process ===
Line 109: Line 110:
  
 **Expertise of those involved in the design:** **Expertise of those involved in the design:**
 +----
  
 === Construction Process === === Construction Process ===
Line 122: Line 123:
  
 **Construction issues** **Construction issues**
 +----
  
 === Building Codes and Standards=== === Building Codes and Standards===
Line 149: Line 150:
  
 **Additional comments on maintenance and building condition** **Additional comments on maintenance and building condition**
 +----
  
 === Construction Economics === === Construction Economics ===
Line 197: Line 198:
 ---- ----
  
-==== 4. Earthquakes ====+==== 5. Earthquakes ====
  
 === Past Earthquakes in the country which affected buildings of this type=== === Past Earthquakes in the country which affected buildings of this type===
Line 207: Line 208:
 | 2005 | 11.198N | 6.6 | 6 (MMI) | | 2005 | 11.198N | 6.6 | 6 (MMI) |
  
 +----
  
 === Past Earthquakes === === Past Earthquakes ===
Line 216: Line 218:
 **Additional comments on earthquake damage patterns:** **Additional comments on earthquake damage patterns:**
  
 +----
 === Structural and Architectural Features for Seismic Resistance === === Structural and Architectural Features for Seismic Resistance ===
  
Line 241: Line 243:
 | Maintenance | Buildings of this type are generally well maintained and there are no visible signs of deterioration of building elements (concrete, steel, timber). | FALSE | | Maintenance | Buildings of this type are generally well maintained and there are no visible signs of deterioration of building elements (concrete, steel, timber). | FALSE |
  
 +----
  
 === Additional comments on structural and architectural features for seismic resistance === === Additional comments on structural and architectural features for seismic resistance ===
Line 264: Line 267:
 **Earthquake-resilient features in foundation:​** ​ **Earthquake-resilient features in foundation:​** ​
  
 +----
  
 === Seismic Vulnerability Rating === === Seismic Vulnerability Rating ===
  
-For information about how seismic vulnerability ratings were selected see the [[ | Seismic Vulnerability Guidelines]]+For information about how seismic vulnerability ratings were selected see the {{ :​wiki:​seismic_vulnerability_rating.docx ​| Seismic Vulnerability Guidelines}}
  
 |   ​^ ​ High vulnerabilty ​     ^^  Medium vulnerability ​     ^^  Low vulnerability ​     ^^ |   ​^ ​ High vulnerabilty ​     ^^  Medium vulnerability ​     ^^  Low vulnerability ​     ^^
Line 277: Line 281:
 ---- ----
  
-==== 5. Retrofit Information ====+==== 6. Retrofit Information ====
  
 === Description of Seismic Strengthening Provisions === === Description of Seismic Strengthening Provisions ===
Line 284: Line 288:
 | Walls | 1. Bamboo: Several researchers have been involved with using internal horizontal and vertical bamboo, in a fashion similar to reinforced concrete masonry walls. 2. Timber ring beam: This helps to hold the walls together and facilitate transfer of loads from the roof to the walls. 3. '​Improved Adobe' has long been promoted to make adobe buildings more robust under seismic activity. The '​system'​ does not utilise another material, but focuses on the design and planning of adobe buildings by limiting opening sizes, plan dimensions, wall lengths and heights, and roof weight | | Walls | 1. Bamboo: Several researchers have been involved with using internal horizontal and vertical bamboo, in a fashion similar to reinforced concrete masonry walls. 2. Timber ring beam: This helps to hold the walls together and facilitate transfer of loads from the roof to the walls. 3. '​Improved Adobe' has long been promoted to make adobe buildings more robust under seismic activity. The '​system'​ does not utilise another material, but focuses on the design and planning of adobe buildings by limiting opening sizes, plan dimensions, wall lengths and heights, and roof weight |
 | Roof | Adequate connections to a top timber or concrete ring beam and stronger connections in the framing itself will help the roof act as a diaphragm. Galvanized sheet metal is now common and helps reduces high loads. For thermal and aesthetic reasons, how ever, clay tile continues to be used. | | Roof | Adequate connections to a top timber or concrete ring beam and stronger connections in the framing itself will help the roof act as a diaphragm. Galvanized sheet metal is now common and helps reduces high loads. For thermal and aesthetic reasons, how ever, clay tile continues to be used. |
 +----
 +**Additional comments on seismic strengthening provisions:​** The bamboo strengthening scheme is not used in Nicaragua, but is presented here as an option for making Nicaragua buildings safer.
 +
 +**Has seismic strengthening described in the above table been performed?:​** Bamboo: Yes, it has been implemented in Peru with successful structural results, but unsuccessful local adoption of the concept. The system has not been used in Nicaragua. Timber ring beam: These are common now but often limited finances ensure they are out of reach for many in Nicaragua. '​Improved Adobe':​ Some principles are used, such as small openings and walls, but others are not evident, such as buttresses.
 +
 +**Was the work done as a mitigation effort on an undamaged building or as a repair following earthquake damages?:** All work done was only as part of the mitigation efforts.
 +
 +**Was the construction inspected in the same manner as new construction?:​** ​
 +
 +**Who performed the construction:​ a contractor or owner/user? Was an architect or engineer involved?:​** Technical assistance was used in the Bamboo implementation. Timber ring beams are often incorporated in new constructions by the occupants.
 +
 +**What has been the performance of retrofitted buildings of this type in subsequent earthquakes?:​** The bamboo system and timber ring beams have proven structurally successful in earthquakes.
 +
 +**Additional comments section 6:** 
  
 {{:​wiki:​whe_8.jpg?​direct&​400|}} {{:​wiki:​whe_9.jpg?​direct&​400|}} {{:​wiki:​whe_10.jpg?​direct&​400|}} {{:​wiki:​whe_11.jpg?​direct&​400|}} ​ {{:​wiki:​whe_8.jpg?​direct&​400|}} {{:​wiki:​whe_9.jpg?​direct&​400|}} {{:​wiki:​whe_10.jpg?​direct&​400|}} {{:​wiki:​whe_11.jpg?​direct&​400|}} ​
  
  
 +==== 7. References ====
 +
 +Guidelines for earthquake resistant non-engineered construction IAEE National Information Center of Earthquake Engineering,​ IIT Kanpur, India 2004
 +----
 +An improved means of reinforcing adobe walls- external vertical reinforcement Dowling,D. & Samali,B. & Jianchun,L. Sismo Adobe, Lima, Peru 2005
 +----
 +Adobe and rammed earth buildings: design and construction McHenry,P. John Wiley and Sons, Canada 1984
 +----
 +Building with earth: a handbook Norton,J. Intermediate Technology Group, Warwickshire,​ UK 1986
 +----
 +Earthquake database search, [[http://​www.ngdc.noaa.gov]] National Geophysical Data Centre, Date accessed: 15/3/2006
 +
 +=== Authors ===
 +^ Name ^ Title ^ Affiliation ^ Location ^ Email ^
 +| Matthew A. French |  | Architecture,​ Victoria University of Wellington | 15 Landcross Street, Wellington 4001, NEW ZEALAND | emailformatthew @hotmail.com |
 +
 +=== Reviewers ===
 +^ Name ^ Title ^ Affiliation ^ Location ^ Email ^
 +| Andrew W. Charleson | Associate Professor | School of Architecture,​ Victoria University of Wellington | Wellington 6001, NEW ZEALAND | andrew.charleson@vuw.ac.nz |
  
  • whe_example_nicaragua.txt
  • Last modified: 2017/04/07 19:50
  • by Vitor Silva