Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

UNDERSTANDING VULNERABILITIES :
I (Vulnerability of Physical Structures)

Goals
To develop an understanding of the vulnerability of the
physical structures and their causes

Learning outcomes Keywords/phrases

After completing this session you will be able to Engineered

construction
understand the: Non-engineered
• Structural vulnerability of physical structures construction
Owner-built
• Non-structural vulnerability buildings
• Functional vulnerability Critical facilities
Lifelines
Structural
Learning objectives vulnerability
Causative factors
As you work through this session you will learn to Assessment
9 Describe engineered, non-engineered, owner built Building typology
Vulnerability
buildings, critical facilities and life lines and criteria functions
to be considered for their design Masonry buildings
Framed buildings
9 Explain causative factors of structural vulnerability Non-structural
9 Understand building typology and list vulnerability
Assessment
characteristics and vulnerability functions of Functional
different building types vulnerability
Assessment
9 Describe non-structural vulnerability and its
assessment
9 Describe functional vulnerability and its
assessment

1. Concepts

Engineered Constructions:

These are the structures (e.g., buildings) that are designed and
constructed as per standard engineered practices. In case of
buildings, engineered construction are those that are supposed to
have been designed by a competent engineer or architect and have
undergone the formal process of regular building permit by the
municipal or other pertinent authority. The formal building permit
process is supposed to require involvement of an architect/engineer
in the design and construction for ensuring compliance to the
existing building code and planning bylaws. In most developing
countries, formal building permit process is observed only in urban
areas. In developing countries, building codes (with earthquake

∗
This course material is being made available by Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC),
Bangkok under Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA)
project, to the participating universities and institutions for educational purpose only. Reproduction of
materials for educational purpose is encouraged as long as ADPC is acknowledged.

1
Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

safety consideration) either do not exist, or not implemented strictly.

Therefore, consideration of seismic input on building design depends
upon the individual initiative of the designers, the prevalent
construction practices in the region/country, the prevalent
construction practices in the region/country, and the availability of
funds. In case clients require(d) design against earthquakes in a
country does not (did not) have regulation to govern the design of
strength of structures, it is (was) a common practice for the engineer
to use the code of the country in which he/she was trained.

Under such conditions, there is no consistency in the design of

structures. While they may be significant proportions of well
designed structures that can withstand the earthquake forces, some
percentage of engineered construction have been designed for only
vertical loads of gravity and not for the horizontal/vertical load that an
earthquake exerts on the building. The 85 high-rise buildings that
collapsed during the Bhuj Earthquake of January 2001 are evidence
to this fact.

It is thought that there are not consistent anti-seismic measures

applied to the design of many bridges in several developing
countries. Seismic code for bridges simply does not exist in many
countries.

Site-specific studies to assess seismic risk are usually carried out in

donor-funded larger projects (e.g., hydroelectric dam and important
bridge sites).

Non-engineered Constructions:

These are physical structures (e.g., buildings) the construction of

which usually has not been through the formal building permit
process. It implies that the construction of non-engineered building
has not been designed or supervised by an architect/engineer. Such
buildings are obviously prevalent in the rural or non-urban (including
urbanizing areas in the periphery of municipal areas. However, a
large percentage of the building stock (in some case a vast majority)
even urban areas of many developing countries are non-engineered
constructions. In the urban areas of Kathmandu, it is estimated that
more than 90 percent of existing building stock are non-engineered
(partly because there are many old historic buildings), and every
year about 5000 more such non-engineered buildings are added.

Owner-built buildings:

These are buildings constructed by the owner at the guidance and

with the involvement of a head-mason or a carpenter who lacks
comprehensive knowledge on earthquake resistant construction.
Traditional construction materials such as timber, stone rubble or
brick (fired or un-burnt) and mud as mortar are used. There is
usually no input from any engineer. These are usually rural

2
Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

constructions. However, such constructions are seen also in the

poorer part of a city, or in the city suburbs.

Needless to say that these buildings are usually highly vulnerable to

earthquakes.

Critical Facility

A critical facility has a specific functionality requirements and life-

safety protection during or following an earthquake. Hospitals, water
supply, electricity, telephony are example. Usually one talks about a
critical system. Components of a critical system could be 1) the
building structure, 2) ancillary structures such as pipes, ducts, etc.;
3) equipment, and a human action that is required to provide function
of the critical system.

Usually, it is regarded necessary to require stricter regulations for

earthquake-resistance of buildings belonging to critical facilities
because of their occupancy (schools), function after a major disaster
(hospitals and communication centers), or because they are
nationally important (museums) or they house toxic materials.

Lifelines

These are the critical facilities on which a city depends for the
continued existence of its population such as water and wastewater
systems, power systems, communication, etc.

Transportation Systems
Roads/bridges, ports, airports are referred to as the transportation
systems. Sometimes they are included as part of lifelines.

2. Vulnerability

For a systematic understanding it is necessary to distinguish the

following categories of vulnerabilities:

¾ Structural vulnerability
¾ Non-structural Vulnerability
¾ Functional Vulnerability

2.1 Structural Vulnerability

2.1.1 Definition

This category of vulnerability pertains to the structural elements of

the buildings, e.g., load bearing walls, columns, beams, floor and
roof.

3
Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

2.1.2 Causative Factors

1. Location of the Structure (building): Location determines the

type and extent of the expected hazard (severity of ground
shaking) liquefaction, earthquake-induced landslide or tsunami
run off). A building located in soft soil, or over liquefiable sand
stratum, is likely to be more vulnerable than that located on
firmer foundation soil strata.

2. Number of Buildings (in the system) and Space in between:

If the buildings at abutting against each other, the behavior of
one during the earthquake will influence that of the other. A well
designed and well constructed earthquake-resistant will be
affected adversely by the vibration of the weaker building that is
abutting against it. Usually, a structural seismic joint (a gap) is
allowed between two adjacent buildings to avoid such mutual
influence during earthquake shaking.

In case of tall buildings, lack of proper space in between

buildings gives rise to pounding effect: part of the collapsed
building may fall onto the next.

3. Number of Stories: In the condition of the lack of control over

the design and quality control during construction in developing
countries, it can be said that the vulnerability of a building
increases with its height.

4. Shape (Configuration): Complex shapes (e.g., L-shape, Y-

shape, H-shape etc.) increase the building’s vulnerability to
damage and destruction during an earthquake. The re-entrant
angles attract excessive concentration of stresses during the
earthquake. Solid circular, square, and triangular plans are the
best. Rectangular building plan should have its length not more
than 3-times its width. Structural joints (separation) should be
provided if such overall configuration can not be avoided due to
any constraint. Structural regularity can also be achieved by
distributing lateral elements in the building in such a way that
they do not cause excessive torsion.

5. Symmetry: A building that is symmetrical in plan as well as in

elevations (both directions) performs much better than an
asymmetrical building during an earthquake. Symmetry is
measured with respect to the distribution of the lateral resisting
elements of the building in plane and in elevation.

6. Age of Buildings: In developing countries, buildings are often

designed to last for 50 years and more. Many buildings do stand
more than 50 years, no doubt. However, vulnerability increases
with the age. It is a wise practice to conduct vulnerability
assessment of old buildings.

4
Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

7. Construction Typology (type of Building): Timber, Adobe,

brick-masonry, stone masonry, cement-block masonry, and
concrete frame are the principal types of building construction in
cities of Asia. As the building type and the construction materials
employed is the most important factor while considering seismic
vulnerability, it will be treated in a separate section below.

8. Alteration: Alterations are frequently done due to the changes in

the requirements with time. Unfortunately, not all of the
alterations are done at the advice of cognizant technical
personnel. This practice leads to increased vulnerability of
buildings.

One important form of alteration is “adding stories” to the existing

building to gain additional floor space. This practice appears to
be rampant in developing countries. Even hospital buildings
have been modified by adding stories. This is a dangerous
practice as it may shapely increase seismic vulnerability.

Many times the structural joints between buildings are found to

be rendered ineffective by the provision of structural connections
(e.g., by constructing a corridor) linking the two building parts.

Alterations and /or remodeling done within the hospital in an

attempt to create new spaces or fit new structures or equipment
without considering the effect these alterations would have on
the general strength of the structure may become a liability (on
a long term1 rather than an improvement for the hospital. There
had been cases in which the structural walls that were part of
the original design of a building were broken in order to install
air-conditioning units. These alterations might have been done
afterwards when the original design engineers were no longer
associated with the construction. Even small openings for
window-type air conditioners made through an important load-
bearing wall may spell disaster. The results of these openings
are weaker structural walls that could result in a failure or partial
collapse during an earthquake, even if the initial design was
seismic-resistant.
PAHO, Mitigation of Disasters, Volume 3, 49

9. Maintenance: A poorly maintained building becomes gradually

vulnerable as the unattended weak element accelerates
deterioration causing the whole structure to become weak.
Closure of the structural joints by construction debris during
subsequent modifications is seen frequently. Corrosion of steel
and of reinforcing could reduce the strength of a building with
time.

5
Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

3. Building Typology and Vulnerability

The outstanding characteristic of the structural damage of 1988

earthquake is that it was limited to clay, brick or stone buildings
in mud mortar and the structures were shattered to ground. Life
loss was severe in these buildings than newly constructed
timber or RC framed buildings. Among the small number of
wooden or reinforced buildings that existed, no serious damage
was observed which leads to the conclusion that the intensity of
the shock was not great enough. But, because the material of
these constructions do not have good lateral strength, low
tensile strength and shear strength, inferior ductility so they
cannot survive the excitation. Should a shock with an intensity
higher than 1988 earthquake be experienced, catastrophic
damage leading to complete collapse similar to observed in
masonry buildings might take place in RC framed buildings.
Fuziwara et al., 1989

3.1 Load bearing masonry buildings

Most of the load-bearing masonry structures are un-reinforced. This

is a very common building type which can be distinguished into two
major categories, notably, 1) traditional buildings (low strength
masonry (LSM), and 2) modern masonry.

3.1.1 Traditional buildings/low strength masonry buildings

Coincidentally, these buildings are in general symmetrical in plan

and elevation, lack heavy projections; openings are small and well
positioned. These are good features from earthquake point of view.

Stone in mud is the most common construction material for walling in

mountains and hills. Sun dried or fired brick in mud mortar is
common in plains, hills, and valleys where stone is not available.

Wall thickness varies from 350mm to 600mm in general. These

buildings are in general one to two story plus attic.

Floors are generally made of thick layer of soil on timber structure.

Roofs are generally duo pitched with gable walls at ends. Slate, clay
tiles and thatch, wood shingle are used for roofing.

Floors and roofs are flexible in nature.

Vulnerability:

These buildings are generally found to be deficient in earthquake

resistance because of the poor quality of their construction and lack
of aseismic features. The material lacks ductility, tensile- or shear
strength. These building behave as if stacked construction material.
The deficient features include:

6
Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

• Weak Wall Junctions: The bond between orthogonal walls is

weak as these walls are erected independently for large
heights, weak mortar, no connecting elements between them.
It suppresses development of box effect and walls behave as
if these are free standing cantilever walls and during shaking,
walls normal to the earthquake force splits and topple down
(out of plane failure). Gable walls are even more susceptible
to shaking as these stand at the top of the building almost
without any connection with roof.
• Lack of Integrity between Load-bearing Elements
• Lack of a diaphragm
• Long unsupported walls
• Delamination of walls
• Out-of-plane instability of walls due to low thickness-to-height
ratio
• Large and unsymmetrical openings

Note: These buildings are not to be confused with the historic

buildings of archaeological importance, such as in Kathmandu,
Bangkok or in cities of China and Japan, which do incorporate
seismic-resistant elements, and are made predominantly of timber
and/or have thick walls compared to their height and relatively few
and small openings. They are considerably earthquake-resistant.
Their vulnerability comes mainly from aging.

3.1.2 Modern masonry buildings

These are generally made of fired brick or stone in cement or lime

mortar with one brick thick walls (250 mm). Lime mortar is less and
less used now. With some part or some stories in mud mortar and
other in cement mortar can be seen very often. These buildings are
generally limited up to three stories. Story height is usually 3-3.6m.
Floor and roofs are, in general, flat made of cast-in-situ reinforced
concrete, reinforced brick and concrete slab. Openings are large and
more in number. These are usually constructed for residential
purposes so room sizes are small but many time half brick thick
walls are used for cross walls. Shifting of wall position in upper
stories is very common. In general these buildings are irregular in
plan and elevation.

Vulnerability: Vulnerability of these buildings to earthquake is

caused by:

• Weak wall Junctions

• Long Unsupported walls
• Large and unsymmetrical opening
• Out-of-plane instability of walls due to low thickness-to-height
ratio
• Soft-story effect
• Improperly anchored parapets

7
Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

In addition to this buildings with flexible floor have following

deficiencies:

• Lack of Integrity between Load-Bearing Elements

• Lack of diaphragm actions

3.2 Framed buildings

Traditionally timber or bamboo was used for construction of framed

buildings, especially in the plain areas of the tropics and the sub-
tropics. In recent years, as a result of the depletion of timber,
increased cost of a lot in the urban areas, increased economic
activity, urbanization, accessibility to information and material,
construction of transportation facilities even in remote areas, there is
an increased desire for higher building and use of modern materials
such as steel and concrete, and hence RC framed buildings are
gaining popularity.

3.2.1 Reinforced concrete (RC) framed buildings

The present trend of building construction in urban areas for

residential, shop-cum-residential and shop-cum-office-cum-
residential buildings is to use reinforced concrete (RC) beam column
frames and RC slab with randomly placed unanchored brick walls in
two directions. It is usual to have shops in ground floor, with large
openings in one or more adjacent faces in market areas. Also
cantilevered projection up to 1.2 m is common in upper stories along
all open faces especially along the urban streets. Unanchored thin
brick walls of full height are erected on the edge to increase size of
the room. Window size is generally big. Story height is usually 3.0-
3.6m.

These structures usually comprise a very light concrete frame

generally with column sizes 22.5x22.5 cm or slightly more, and four
to six number of 12mm diameter reinforcing longitudinal bars and
6mm diameter stirrups at the spacing of 20 to 25 cm. The detail of
reinforcing does not follow the accepted practices in other highly
seismic countries. These types of buildings up to six stories are very
common.

Vulnerability: RC frame construction type has become prevalent in

the past two or three decades, and it has introduced a myth that the
buildings of this type are infinitely strong and can be constructed as
high as needed. Such false sense of safety has led to severe
deficiency in strength. The size of the columns and beams usually
constructed for as high as five stories, are in fact adequate only for
two to three stories if seismic load is to be considered. Additionally,
the structural components (columns and beams) badly lack
“ductile”detailing Ductility refers to the ability of a concrete building to
shake and deform while preserving the integrity of its load-bearing
system. Ductility is achieved in concrete by respecting special

8
Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

requirements for the amount and placement of steel reinforcing and

the detailing of the connections. In addition, concrete relies on the
bond between the mixture of gravel, sand, cement, steel and water.
Quality control is thus important in concrete construction to ensure
that the material is build according to the engineering specifications.
The other deficiencies are:

• Short Column effect: when any or all of the beam-column

portions are filled up with masonry brick wall only partially leaving
wide opening e.g., for windows. This situation leads to excessive
concentration of stresses during earthquakes, at the corners of
the openings.
• Soft-story effect: This is the situation when there is no infill
masonry wall in the column-beam frame. Such conditions prevail
in the developing countries allowed openings. Soft story
conditions can cause premature collapse of buildings.
• Out of plane failure of infill walls (because the are not joined with
the beam (vertical) or the column (horizontal)
• Strong column-weak beam system not maintained. The beam
rests on columns. Hence, it is logical to have stronger columns in
comparison to the strength of the beam. Many times the opposite
is prevalent due to some unknown reason.
• Lack of ductile detailing. This means:
i. Anchorage problem
ii. Lack of confining bars
iii. Steel congestion problem
iv. Lack and deficiency in shear stirrups

The above discussed deficiencies have made buildings severely

vulnerable to seismic shaking.

3.3 Summary of deficiencies that cause vulnerability of built

structures

3.3.1 Planning deficiencies

The deficiencies are (common to both load bearing and masonry

buildings):
i. Pounding effect (along urban streets).
ii. Large length to breath ratio (difficult load transfer
mechanisms!).
iii. Large height to breathe ratio (instability!).
iv. Large offsets in plan and elevation - unequal distribution of
stiffness – (torsional effects.)
v. Soft story effect (concentration of deformation!).
vi. Unequal/unbalanced distribution of lateral load resisting
elements (torsional effects!)

9
Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

3.3.2 Deficiencies of load bearing masonry buildings

i. Large and unsymmetrical opening (lack of lateral load

resisting elements & torsional effects!).
ii. Weak Wall Junctions (loss of box action!).
iii. Long unsupported walls (behave as cantilever wall!).
iv. Thin walls compared to their height (out-of-plan instability)
v. Delamination of walls (reduction in load carrying capacity!).
vi. Improperly anchored parapets (toppling of wall).

Buildings with flexible floor have following additional deficiency:

i. Lack of Integrity between Load-Bearing Elements (scattering

of members, loss of box action!).
ii. Lack of diaphragm actions (no proportionate distribution of
lateral load!).

3.3.3 Deficiency in RC Framed Building

i. Strength deficiency
ii. Out of plane failure of infill walls
iii. Short Column effect (shear failure!)
iv. Strong column weak beam not maintained
v. Soft story/weak story conditionSplash effect
vi. Lack of ductile detailing (no energy dissipation!)
a. Anchorage problem
b. Lack of confining bars
c. Steel congestion problem
d. Lack and deficiency in shear stirrups (bursting of
columns).

3.4 Vulnerability assessment (structural)

Vulnerability assessment involves first identifying all the elements of

a building which may be at risk from earthquake.

As the first step, a qualitative assessment is usually done. The

results of a qualitative assessment help identify the priority problems
that should be addressed. Survey formats have been developed for
qualitative assessment (FEMA 310; ATC22).
Loss functions in the form of vulnerability curves or damage
probability matrices are available for obtaining the damage ratio for
different types of buildings at different intensities of earthquake
shaking. These are prepared based on actual observation of
damage due to an earthquake at various localities.

10
Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

(Note: Damage ratio is expressed in terms of economic loss to a single building unit with respect to its
reconstruction cost).
A Buildings in field stone, rural buildings, adobe house, and mud house (1 to 1.5 stories).
A- A-type building but with 3 storey height (2 storied in between A and A-).
A+ A-type clay buildings but with horizontal and vertical timbers incorporated.
B Buildings with mud mortar, ordinary brick, large blocks, natural dressed stone or half-timbered
buildings with height up to 1 to 1.5 stories, or with cement mortar in brick masonry and height up
to 3 stories.
B- B-type rural buildings with traditional materials and height up to three stories, or brick masonry
buildings in cement mortar with large openings with irregular plans and height up to five stories.
B+ B-type rural buildings with improved configurations in case of rural buildings, or brick masonry
buildings in cement mortar with compact plans, permissible openings and height up to three
stories.
B++ Strengthened initially, or retrofitted as for earthquake-resistant brick buildings of B, B-, B+
C1 Strengthened good quality brick buildings in cement mortar (with seismic reinforcement, up to 3
stories)
C2 Normally designed Reinforced Concrete (RC) buildings (designed for normal load only) or
mason-designed 3 storey RC buildings (Kathmandu Valley)
C3 Specially designed RC buildings.
C(k5) Mason-designed 5 storey RC buildings (Kathmandu Valley).
(Source: HMGN/ MHPP, 1994d.)

Quantitative assessment of structural vulnerability of buildings

involves detailed analysis often using computer software. New
standards for the evaluation of existing buildings have recently been
made available to engineering professionals. One such set of
standards is the so-called FEMA310 document, which is in used in
the USA and can be adapted to reflect the conditions in other
countries. The ATC-40 document specifically addresses the
evaluation of existing concrete buildings. A high level of expertise is
typically required for the evaluation of existing buildings.
Unfortunately, such level of expertise is sometimes lacking in
developing countries. One of the issues is in the training of
engineers and other professionals, which often does not address the
study of the vulnerability of existing buildings. Several computer
programs exist to model existing buildings in order to quantify the
level of stress and deformation in structural members. Damage and
performance acceptability is measured with respect to the ratio of
demand versus capacity taking into consideration the level of
ductility in the building component. NSET-Nepal used the software
MASONRY (developed by the University of Roorkee, India) for the
analysis of masonry buildings, and the software SAP2000 for the
analysis of other two hospital buildings of Kathmandu Valley.

Many aspects of vulnerability cannot be described in monetary

terms, such as personal loss of family, home, income and related

11
Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

human suffering and psychosocial problems, but these should not be

overlooked.

4. Non-Structural Vulnerabilities

4.1 Basic concepts

"Nonstructural" usually refers to things that are designed by

someone other than the structural engineer; however, nonstructural
walls are required to have some strength. For example, interior
non-bearing partitions are generally required to be designed to resist
a minimum design lateral force. This is intended to provide some
resistance to seismic forces perpendicular to the wall and to ensure
a minimum stiffness to the walls.

Non-structural elements of a building include ceilings, windows,

doors, non-load-bearing partition walls, and electrical, mechanical,
plumbing equipment and installations, and other contents. A building
can remain standing after a disaster but still be unserviceable due to
non-structural damage. Moreover, the non-structural elements could
also lead to structural damage to the building and cause physical
injury to the occupants.

The cost of the damage to non-structural elements in residential

buildings generally averages about 30% of the total loss. In offices
and critical facilities, such cost may be considerable higher than that
of the structural elements. This is especially true for hospitals where
85% to 90% of the value of the installation is not in the support
column, floors and beams, but in the architectural design,
mechanical and electrical systems and in the equipment contained in
the building (Dr. Reinaldo Flores, in introduction to the newly
prepared draft “Protocol for assessment of the Health Facilities in
Responding to Emergencies: Making a Difference to Vulnerability,
WHO, 1999, Geneva).

4.2 Vulnerable non-structural elements

The following sections list the non-structural vulnerable elements

4.2.1 Partitions

Masonry and Tile. These partitions can have severe cracking or

loss of units. Compression failures can occur at the tops of the
partitions, or at the joints. These partitions may collapse and fail due
to perpendicular wall-to-wall loads. This is a life-safety concern!
Gypsum Board or Plaster. These partitions may overturn due to
local ceiling failures. Finishes may crack or detach from the studs.
Demountable Partitions of Metal. Wood, and/or Glass. These
partitions may separate from the supporting channels, possibly
resulting in overturning. Fixed glass may crack or separate from
remainder of partition.

12
Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

4.2.2 Ceilings

Suspended Lay-In Tile Systems. Hangers may unwind or break.

Tiles may separate from the suspension system and fall. Breakage
may also occur at seismic joints and at building perimeters.
Suspended Plaster or Gypsum Board. Plaster may have finish
cracks that could lead to spalling. Hangers may break. Gypsum
board or plaster may separate from the suspension system and fall.
Surface Applied Tile. Plaster, or Gypsum Board. Plaster may
crack and spall. Ceiling tiles may fall due to adhesive failures.

4.2.3 Light fixtures

Lay In Fluorescent. Ceiling movement can cause fixtures to

separate and fall from suspension systems. Parts within the fixtures
are prone to separate from the housing.
Stem or Chain Hung Fluorescent. The stem connection to
structural elements may fail. Fixtures may twist severely, causing
breakage in stems or chains. Long rows of fixtures placed end to end
are often damaged due to the interaction. Long stem fixtures tend to
suffer more damage than short stem units. Parts within the fixture
may separate from the housing and fall.
Surface Mounted Fluorescent. Ceiling mounted fixtures perform in
a fashion similar to lay-in fixtures. Wall fixtures generally perform
better than ceiling fixtures. Parts within the fixture may separate from
the housing and fall.
Stem Hung Incandescent. These fixtures are usually suspended
from a single stem or chain that allows them to sway. This swaying
may cause the light and/or the fixture to break after encountering
other structural or nonstructural components.
Surface Mounted Incandescent. Ceiling movement -can cause
fixtures co separate and fall from suspension systems. Wall mounted
fixtures perform well.

4.2.4 Doors and frames

Frames can warp from warp from deformations, possibly causing the
doors to bind.

4.2.5 Mechanical equipment

Rigidly Mounted Large Equipment (e.g., Boilers. Chillers, Tanks.

Generators) : Shearing of anchor bolts can occur and lead to
horizontal motion. Unanchored equipment may move and damage
connecting utilities. Tall tanks may overturn. Performance is
generally good when positive attachment to the structure is provided.
Vibration Isolated Equipment (e.g., Fans, Pumps): . Isolation
devices can fail and cause equipment to fall. Unrestrained motion
can lead to damage. Suspended equipment is more susceptible to
damage than mounted equipment. This is a life-safety concern!

13
Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

4.2.6 Piping

Large diameter rigid piping can fail at elbows, tees, and connections
to supported equipment. Joints may separate and hangers may fail.
Hanger failures can cause progressive failure of other hangers or
supports. Failures may occur in pipes that cross seismic joints, due
to differential movements and adjacent rigid supports. The increased
flexibility of small diameter pipes often allows them to perform better
than larger diameter pipes, although they are subject to damage at
the joints. Piping in vertical runs typically performs better than in
horizontal runs if regularly connected to a vertical shaft.

4.2.7 Ducts

Breakage is most common at bends. Supporting yokes may also fail

at connection to the structural element. Failures may occur in long
runs due to large amplitude swaying. Failure usually consists of
leakage only and not collapse.

4.2.8 Electrical equipment

Tall panels may overturn when they are not bolted or braced.
Equipment may move horizontally if not positively anchored to the
floor.

4.2.9 Elevators

Counterweights and Guide Rails. Counterweights may separate

from rails. Counterweights may also damage structural members,
cables, and cabs. This is a life-safety concern!
Motor/Generator. The motor (or generator) may shear off the
vibration isolators.
Control Panels. Control panels can overturn when they are not
anchored.
Cars and Guiding Systems. Cars and guiding systems generally
perform well, except that cables may separate from drums and
sheaver.
Hoistway Doors. Doors can jam or topple due to shaking or
excessive drift.
Hydraulic Elevator Systems. These systems usually perform well
except that the cylinders may shift out-of-plumb.

4.2.10 Exterior cladding/glazing or veneers

Exterior wall panels or cladding can fall onto the adjacent property if
their connections to the building frames have insufficient strength
and/or ductility. This is a life-safety concern!

If glazing is not sufficiently isolated from structural motion, or above

12 feet, it can shatter and fall onto adjacent property.

14
Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

4.2.11 Parapets, cornices, ornamentation and appendages

If any of these items are of insufficient strength and/or are not

securely attached to the structural elements, they may break off and
fall onto storefronts, streets, sidewalks, or adjacent property. This is
a life-safety concern!

4.2.12 Means of egress

Hollow tile or unreinforced masonry walls often fail and litter stairs
and corridors. This is a life-safety concern!

Stairs connected _to each floor can be damaged due to inter-story

drift, especially in flexible structures such as moment frame
buildings.

Veneers, cornices, ornaments, and canopies over exits can fall and
block egress. This is a life-safety concern!

Corridor and/or stair-doors may jam due to partition distortion.

Lay-in ceiling tiles and light fixtures can fall and block egress.

4.2.13 Building content and furnishings

Desk-Top Equipment. Desk-top equipment, such as computers,

printers, plotters, may slide off and fall if it is not sufficiently anchored
to the desk.
File Cabinets. Tall file cabinets may tip over and fall if they are not
anchored to resist overturning forces. Unlatched cabinet drawers
may slide open and fall.
Storage Cabinets and Racks. Tall, narrow storage cabinets or
racks can tip over and fall if they are not anchored to resist
overturning forces. This is a life-safety concern!
Plants. Artwork and Other Objects. Plants, artwork and other
objects that are located on top of desks or cabinets can fall if they
are not anchored to resist their lateral movement.
Items Stored on Shelves. Items stored on shelving, such as in
laboratories or retail stores, can fall if they are not restrained from
sliding off the shelves.
Computers and Communications Equipment. Tall, narrow
equipment can overturn and fall if it is not anchored to resist
overturning forces.

4.2.14 Hazardous materials

Because of the secondary dangers that can result from damage to

vessels that contain hazardous materials, special precautions should
be considered for the proper bracing and restraint of these elements.

15
Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

Compressed Gas Cylinders. Unrestrained compressed gas

cylinders can be damaged such that the gas is released and/or
ignited. This is a life-safety concern!
Laboratory Chemicals. Unrestrained chemicals can mix and react if
they are spilled. This is a life-safety concern.
Concentrated Chlorine Gas. Often used for water purification,
concentrated chlorine if released in the air can be very harmful to
people.
Piping . Piping that contains hazardous materials can leak if shut-off
valves or other devices are not provided. This is a life-safety
concern!

4.3 Other vulnerable conditions

The following provide some additional discussion of vulnerable

conditions in a building due to other factors.

Improper Location: The presence of heavy equipment on a particular

floor of a building alters its response to shaking during earthquakes.
On higher floors, in addition to the stress concentration the heavy
machinery may cause on the ceiling or floors, the heavy objects
attract greater force at the point and may contribute to greater
possibility of damage or collapse. In particular, roof-mounted water
tanks when not accounted for in the design, can induce torsion in a
building.

A wrongly placed cupboard may overturn and block exit during an

earthquake.

Locating a working desk within the reach of a non-structural partition

wall or under a ceiling fan, or near un-curtained windows is also a
vulnerable condition.

Inside-opening doors in a meeting rooms or class rooms create a

vulnerable situation.

Loosely placed flower-pot on the parapet walls could be hazardous

to the passers-by or even to the residents while getting out of the
building during an earthquake.

4.4 Vulnerability assessment (non-structural)

Investigation of nonstructural elements for critical facilities is time-

consuming. Usually, the non-structural elements are not shown in
the plans (in our country even basic architectural plans are difficult to
dig!). Even if plans exist and the elements are shown on it, many
times the mechanical and electrical items are often concealed.
Nevertheless, it is essential to make the investigation because in the
past little attention has been paid to seismic support of these
elements and they are potentially hazardous.

16
Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

Of particular importance in the nonstructural element evaluation

efforts are site visits to identify the present status of nonstructural
items; this effort will take on added importance because
nonstructural elements of structures may be modified many times
during the life of the structure.

MCCER 1999 provide detailed guideline on seismic reliability

assessment of critical facilities. WHO, 1999 provides a detailed
format for the assessment of non-structural vulnerabilities in
hospitals. FEMA 310 (checklist 1) provides a systematic approach
for doing walk-through of buildings and for assessing safety of non-
structural components.

5. Functional Vulnerability

5.1 Basic Concept

Functional vulnerability needs to be considered and eliminated for

institutions, especially the critical facilities such as hospitals,
emergency operation centers, communication centers etc., to ensure
that the services provided by the facilities would keep on running to
meet the demands of the community at the time when these are
most needed. The following section discusses Functional
Vulnerability in case of hospitals.

While assessing functional vulnerability, consideration is made of 1)

location, accessibility, and distribution of the services within the
system, 2) individual services, both medical (equipment and
supplies) and non-medical (utilities, transportation and
communication), that are vital to the continuous operation, and 3)
public services and safety measures available inside the hospital.

5.2 Site and Accessibility

The following are the disadvantageous situation in terms of hospital’s

location.

¾ Location in a congested area of a city with vulnerable buildings

around
¾ Narrow secondary access road
¾ Presence of a bridge separating hospital from the city
¾ Only one road leading to the hospital
¾ Poor condition of the access road
¾ Presence of an industrial firm in the catchment area of the
hospital

5.3 Service Areas Within the Hospital

¾ Proper zoning of different areas (outpatient service, emergency

department, surgical are, kitchen, morgue etc.) that make up the

17
Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

hospital would guarantee adequate level of operation even

during emergencies.
Improper zoning creates the possibility of overcrowding.
¾ Presence and condition of specific areas that can be converted
into spaces for patients during emergencies.
o These areas should have best utilities to remain operational.

5.4 Equipment and Supplies

¾ Availability of minimum supplies of essential equipment. Such list

is available.
¾ Regular inventory of the items.
¾ Proper labeling of the equipment and supplies.
¾ Period of time taken by the hospital to procure equipment and
supplies.
¾ Presence of a system for emergency procurement
¾ Presence of emergency kit containing essential drugs
recommended by the WHO.
¾ Presence of a blood bank in the hospital.

5.5 Utilities

Water
¾ Availability of adequate quantity of water (@ 15-20
liters/person/day for patients plus others for performance of
medical and surgical procedures)
¾ Presence of water storage
¾ Presence of alternate source of water other than the city supply
¾ Presence of treatment system for water from alternate source
¾ Length of time hospital can run on the water storage

Electricity
¾ Proper location of electric control panel and its marking in the
floor plan
¾ Alternate source of electrical supply
¾ Percentage of hospital energy requirements that can be supplied
by the alternate source
¾ Inventory of generators and related equipment, periodic choking
of functionality
¾ Presence of a system of emergency light
¾ Ventilation system

Medical Gas Supply and management

¾ Form of gas supply (individual tanks, piped gas) and system to
manage and prevent their leakage

Warning System and Safety Equipment

¾ Presence of sign system (indicators for escape route, fire-
fighting equipment, building lay-out diagram)
¾ Presence of fire detection system and its location in strategic
places

18
Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

¾ Presence of fire extinguishers and fire safety plan

Transportation and Communication

¾ Presence of communication systems (regular telephone, cellular
phone, Pager, Public address system, short wave radio,
intercoms) including runners for international and external
communication
¾ Presence of alternate communication system for use during
emergency
¾ Adequate means of transportation for patients and staff
¾ Capabilities of ambulances

Public Information
¾ Presence of public information system in normal times
¾ Possibility of continued use of the PI system during emergencies

5.6 Assessment of functional vulnerability of institutions

The discussions in the sections above provided a list of items upon

which the functionality of a hospital depends. The checklist can be
used as a guide for developing similar lists for other institutions
considering the specifics of that particular facility.

Methods of functional vulnerability of hospital are detailed in WHO,

1999. Similarly, MCEER, 1999 provides a methodology and format
for detailed assessment of functional reliability of critical facilities.
These guidelines can very easily be modified to suit any particular
critical facility.

Obviously, common sense should prevail in case of lack or

inaccessibility of required data.

19
Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

References

1. Amir-Mazaheri, D., General Aspects Of Seismic Risk Reduction

In Threatened Regions, Paper Number 2695, Proc. 12 WCEE,
Auckland
2. NSET, (1999) Seismic Hazard and Risk Management in
Kathmandu Valley, Nepal; proceedings of Seminar on Urban
Earthquake Damage Assessment, Building Research Institute,
Tsukuba, Japan, Vol. 33.
3. Bothara, J. K., Parajuli, Y. K., Sharpe, R. D.th Arya, A. S., (2000)
Seismic safety in owner built buildings, 12 World Conference
on Earthquake Engineering, Paper no. Auckland, New Zealand.
4. Coburn, A. & Spencer, R. J. S. (1992) Earthquake protection, J.
Wiley & Sons, New York, USA
5. EERI, (2001) Encyclopedia of Housing Construction Types in
Seismically Prone Areas of the World, Earthquake Engineering
Research Institute (EERI) and IAEE.
6. Johnson, G. S., Sheppard, R. E., Quilici, M. R., Eder, S. J. and
Scawthorn, C. R., (1999) Seismic Reliability Assessment of
Critical Facilities: A Handbook, Supporting Documentation, and
Model Code Provisions, MCEER, Buffalo, NY.
7. NZS 4219: (1983) Seismic Restraint of Building Contents,
Standards New Zealand.
8. NZS 44104:1994, Specification for Seismic Resistance of
Engineering Systems in Buildings, Standards Association of New
Zealand.
9. PAHO, (1992) Disaster Mitigation Guidelines for Hospitals and
Other Health Care Facilities in the Caribbean, Pan American
Health Organization (PAHO).
10. PAHO, (1993) Mitigation of Disasters in Health Facilities
Evaluation and Reduction of Physical and Functional
Vulnerability (four volumes), Pan American Health Organization
(PAHO).
11. WHO, (1999) Protocol for assessment of the health Facilities in
Responding to Emergencies: Making a difference to
Vulnerability.
12. WHO, (1999) Protocol for assessment of the Health Facilities in
Responding to Emergencies: Making a Difference to
Vulnerability, World Health Organization (WHO), 1999, Geneva
(Draft).
13. WHO, Earthquakes and People’s Health, Proc. WHO
Symposium, Kobe, 27-30 January 1997, WHO, Kobe.
14. www.johnmartin.com/EERI
15. ABK, (1984) Methodology for Mitigation of Seismic Hazards in
Existing Unreinforced Masonry Buildings: The Methodology
Topical Report 08, National Science Foundation, Washington,
DC.
16. ACI, (1983) Building Code Requirements for Reinforced

20
Capacity Building in Asia using Information Technology Applications (CASITA) Module 5

Concrete (ACI 318-83), American Concrete Institute, Detroit,

Michigan.
17. Army, (1986) Seismic Design. Guidelines for Essential Buildings,
Departments of the Army (TM-809-10-1), Navy (NAVFAC
P355.1), and the Air Force (AFM 88-3, Chap. 13, Sect. A),
Washington, DC.
18. Army, (1988) Seismic Design Guidelines for Upgrading Existing
Buildings, Departments of the Army (TM-809-10-2), Navy
(NAVFAC P355.2), and the Air Force (AFM 88-3, Chap. 13,
Sect. B), Washington, DC.
19. ATC, (1987) Evaluating the Seismic Resistance of Existing
Buildings, Applied Technology Council Report ATC-14,
Redwood City, California.
20. ATC, (1988) Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings for Potential
Seismic Hazards: A Handbook; Applied Technology Council
Report ATC-21, Redwood City, California. (FEMA 154)
21. ATC, (1989) Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings:
Supporting Documentation, Applied Technology Council,
Redwood City, California.
22. BSSC, (1988) NEHRP Recommended Provisions for the
Development of Seismic Regulations for New Buildings. Building
Seismic Safety Council, Washington, DC. (Parts I, II, and Maps)
23. GSA, (1976) Earthquake Resistance of Buildings, Vol. I-III,
General Services Administration, Washington, DC.
24. SEAOC, (1988) Recommended Lateral Force Requirements and
Tentative Commentary, Seismology Committee, Structural
Engineers Association of California, San Francisco, California.
25. SSC, (1985) Rehabilitating Hazardous Masonry Buildings: A
Draft Model Ordinance, Report No. SSC 85-06, State of
California Seismic Safety Commission.
26. Stratta, James L., (1987) Manual of Seismic Design.
Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
27. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Standards for
the Evaluation of Existing Buildings –FEMA 310, Washington,
DC
28. Applied Technology Council (ATC), Standards for the Evaluation
of Concrete Structures (ATC-40), Applied Technology Council,
Redwood City, California.

21