International Journal of Civil Engineering and OF CIVIL ENGINEERING AND INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308

8 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), IAEME

TECHNOLOGY (IJCIET)

ISSN 0976 6308 (Print) ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), pp. 181-187 IAEME: www.iaeme.com/ijciet.html Journal Impact Factor (2012): 3.1861 (Calculated by GISI) www.jifactor.com

IJCIET
IAEME

PRE-TENSIONED PRECAST ELEMENTS AS A REPLACEMENT TO WOODEN BRACINGS IN THE ARMATURE CROSS WALL SYSTEM: AN ATTEMPT TO REVIVE THE FORGOTTEN HERITAGE

Wani Ahmad1 and Javed Ahmad Bhat2 Address for correspondence 1 B.Tech Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Srinagar, currently with Structural Erection Dept., National Thermal Power Corp., Ltd., Mouda, Nagpur, India. Emal: wani.ahmed@yahoo.com 2 Associate Professor, Civil Engineering Dept., National Institute of Technology, Srinagar. Email: bhat_javed@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT This paper is an attempt to revive the traditional earthquake resistant construction methodology, i.e. armature cross walls, through a scientific and realistic approach, which could ensure seismic safety even at inaccessible and technologically remote areas, which have suffered catastrophic life and property damage in the past earthquakes. The technique advocates the replacement of wooden bracings in the armature wall with pre-tensioned precast elements. The paper outlines the structural framework, and commercial applicability of pretensioned precast elements for ensuring seismically safe and efficient construction even at remote locations without technical knowhow and stringent on-site quality control. A structural and cost analysis, carried out to determine the viability of the concept, proves that it is an apt replacement, and should be commercialized for ensuring seismic safety to the technologically isolated areas as well. KEYWORDS: Armature crosswall system, Kashmir earthquake, pre-tensioned precast element, traditional construction. I. INTRODUCTION The Kashmir region has been struck by numerous earthquakes in the past, including the 2005
181

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), IAEME

earthquake (October 8, 2005, magnitude Mw 7.6 which claimed 73,000 lives, left 70,000 injured, 270,000 buildings were destroyed, and 180,000 damaged). It ranks among the worst natural disasters in the history of the Indian subcontinent and Pakistan [1]. Kashmir region has developed various traditional construction practices, and many such structures still stand firm, proving their earthquake resilience beyond doubt, as compared to their RCC neighbours [2]. While bad construction quality and poor design are some of the explanations for the failure of RCC buildings, a system in which basic safety of life depends on strict quality control doesnt seem very prudent. This leaves us with a thought to incorporate ideas from traditional aseismic methodology into modern construction, so as to enhance its earthquake resilience and give cost efficient, and locally available solutions, while preserving the cultural heritage and skill of the region. Traditional construction has proved successful in the regions of high seismic risk: countries like Turkey, India, Japan, El Salvador, Peru, Kyrgyzstan, Portugal, Italy, etc. Good results have been achieved in these structures without any specific technical knowledge, but through a process of trial and error in building construction techniques [3]. However, the possibility of its applicability in modern day construction, at least in the most archaic forms, is not very strong considering the ever increasing stress of constructing taller due to lateral space constraints, nonavailability of wood, their lack of meeting modern day serviceability requirements, the ever increasing sophistication and their escalating costs. In many developing countries, sophisticated engineering and the delivery of materials of uniform quality is not possible. Thus, in such countries, it is not engineering know how, but rather the local economy, labor supply, materials availability, access to engineering expertise, and thoroughness of inspection which will determine the quality and safety of what is actually built. This is particularly true with reinforced concrete, because of its particular need for quality to avoid collapse from hidden defects [4]. Moreover, in the hilly areas, the machinery required to maintain the on-site quality of construction is also not available, at least not throughout the year, especially in the snow bound areas. In such areas, the building strength is compromised, even with regard to it bearing the dead load, and thus, the thought of it being built as earthquake resistant as per stringent earthquake codes, is a distant dream all together. Out of the many traditional methodologies the armature cross-walls (i.e. the Dhajji Dewari system in Kashmir, and the Humus system is Golcuk) is one of the most effective methodologies [4]. The concept of seismic resilience in traditional construction methodology using locally available materials like wood, soil, bamboo, etc. has also been advocated as earthquake resistant construction technique by various organizations at national and international level [5], [6], [7]. A typical example of wooden bracing in armature cross walls (Dhajji Dewari system) standing safe in top storey whereas the lower storeys are destroyed in 2005 Kashmir earthquake is shown in Fig. 1. However this practice is not in vogue nowadays due to very high cost of timber prevailing in the state of Jammu and Kashmir. Inspired by the same methodology, an attempt has been made to study the scope of replacement of wooden timber cross bracings in the traditional technique by pre-tensioned RCC elements, which would purge most of the shortcomings of traditional construction.

182

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), IAEME

Fig. 1: A photograph showing the upper storey of a house with Dhajji Dewari system, standing safe, and a collapsed lower storey after the 2005 Kashmir earthquake II. STRUCTURAL FRAMEWORK In the present arrangement, timber members have been replaced by pre-tensioned precast elements pinned at the joint to each other wherein their reinforcement would cross each other, and a cotter be used to pin them, followed by light grouting of the joint, simulating an arrangement like that of Dhajji Dewari cross bracings. [See illustration shown in figure]. A typical model of pre-tensioned precast concrete elements is shown in Fig. 2. A cotter (pin) goes through the reinforcement of all members meeting at the joint and thickness of the wall to ensure full joint contact (Fig. 2). Since the elements are pre-tensioned, if used in a proper-trussed configuration (similar to the inclined wooden bracings in the Dhajji Dewari methodology, armature cross walls), the additional tension-resistance could be mobilized, thus increasing their strength. Moreover, pre-tensioning also would impart additional bending resistance to the member to resist dead load of the overlying loose infill material. A light grout should be there to act as cover for the otherwise exposed reinforcement bars, at both the ends of each element. In the event of an earthquake, even if the grout would get damaged to some extent, the mechanism of transfer of forces through the precast truss element would still work. Rather, there would be some sort of dissipation of energy at the joints of the truss, further increasing the earthquake resilience of the structure (similar to that of Dhajji-Dewari system, where lot of earthquake energy is absorbed by frame joints). The damaged joint can be subsequently repaired. The truss element should be cast such that there are some iron nails/thin bars (half length cast inside the member, with rough concrete ends) protruding out, so as to ensure a safe bond with the infill (for efficient energy dissipation). Similar arrangements can be made at the corners to ensure strong joint with the corner column.

183

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), IAEME

Fig. 2: A model of the pre-tensioned precast concrete element III. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS In order to determine the structural suitability of the pre-tensioned elements, an analysis has been carried out. The wood prescribed for use in the Dhajji Dewari system in the bracings is 1 x 4 elements [5]. Deodar wood (cedrus deodarda) with tension strength of 7.2 N/mm2 (for wet and external use) [8] is the most preferred, which is locally available and weather resistant. Thus, for a 1 x 4 cross-section of deodar (cedrus deodarda) with tension strength of 7.2 N/mm 2, the maximum tension resistance is 18KN. Having ascertained the maximum force, an equivalent plain concrete section without any reinforcement, which can resist a similar tensile force, has been found: 0.7 fck 0.5 x cross sectional area = tensile strength Adopting fck = M45, the minimum dimensions required for resisting 18KN are: 70mm x 70mm, which are quite bulky. Also, for a usual length (i.e. 2.5 m bracing in Dhajji Dewari System), the weight of one such element comes out to be approx. 28kgs, which is quite heavy, would instead increase the wall dead load and be very difficult to handle at site. Next, the case of a reinforced concrete element, subject to the same magnitude of force, has also been considered. However, since concrete has a negligible tension strength (4.69N/mm2 for M-45 [9]). Using 4 number, 8mm dia bars, the equivalent size comes out to be 55mm x 55mm and using 4 number, 10mm dia bars, the equivalent size comes out to be 50mm x 50mm making single member (2.5m length) weigh 20 Kg and 17 Kg respectively. These single member weights again are heavy to handle easily at a construction site without any special mechanical device. Thus it is not practically viable to even have a reinforced concrete section subjected to zero tensile stresses for the design load. This leaves us with an option to analyze pre-tensioned precast members for the same force and determine the minimum required dimensions. In the present case first prestressing force and corresponding steel quantity is required followed
184

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), IAEME

by a check for permissible stresses for concrete in compression. Assuming a loss of 20% in prestress, the prestressing force required=22.5 kN. Prestress at service loads, Po = 18kN For a drawn wire, 5mm diameter, Allowable stress in steel = 0.75 x fpk where fpk is minimum tensile strength; fpk = 1570 MPa [10][11] Thus, allowable stress = 1177.5 MPa Required steel area = 16 mm2 On using 4 no. wires 5mm diameter (drawn wire), the section fails in permissible compressive stresses (direct compression). Thus, using 8 no. wires, 5mm diameter (drawn wire), Area of steel provided, Ap = 157 mm2 (> required, O.K) Permissible Compressive stress (direct compression) in concrete=12.5 Mpa x 1.33 being earthquake load to be increased by 33%. Equivalent concrete area required = 2 x 18x103/16.625 =2165mm2 (Twice because of reversal force of earthquake and prestressing force) Required size of member = 36 mm x 36 mm. At service, Ep = 195kN/mm2; Ec= 5000.(45)0.5 = 33541.01 MPa Transformed area, At = Ac + m (As) = 1138.92 + 195/33.541 (157) = 2051.683 mm2 Stresses in concrete are almost nil when there is external tension force due to earthquake coupled with an equivalent compressive stress due to the prestress. Moreover, the section has already been checked for the condition when the member (due to reversal of stresses during earthquakes) comes under external compression force, coupled with compressive stresses due to the prestress. A 2.5m length of this element would weigh a convenient 8.1kgs, and thus, would be easy to handle. Dead load due to mud-brick infill wall (considering the largest sizes possible) = W = 0.5 x 0.5m x 2.45m x 0.1m x 18kN/m3 = 1.1025kN [Assuming vertical post height = 2.45m; horizontal member length = 0.5m; mud bricks = 18kN/m3] There would be no bending due to the dead load of the mud-brick infill, since the bracing element is supported throughout its length on the underside also by infill. The element has, however been checked for crushing failures. Crushing stress = 1102.5N / (2500 x 0.036) mm2 = 12.25N/mm2 < 0.45fck (i.e. 20.25N/mm2) [10] Thus, a pretensioned precast member, with cross sectional dimensions 36mm x 36mm, 2.5m long, with 8 bars of 5mm diameter, prestensioning force of 18kN, weighing a convenient 8.1kgs, sufficiently strong to resist crushing due to infill material has been chosen. IV. COST ANALYSIS A comparative study of the market costs reveals that a pre-tensioned precast concrete element would cost nearly not more than half of what, the wooden element currently costs. As such, it clearly implies that the pre-tensioned precast concrete element has a potential for

185

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), IAEME

commercialization, as it is economically an immensely feasible replacement to the traditional armature cross wall wooden diagonal element. IV. CONCEPT OF STANDARDIZATION AND DISCUSSION The cost effectiveness and ease of manufacturing on a large scale of such elements could facilitate the setting up of standard dimension elements. After proper analysis, some standardization for size (length, gross cross section, and detailing of reinforcement) and configuration for the precast pre-tensioned elements can be done considering their earthquake resilience, the earthquake zone of the area and generally adopted plan dimensions and elevation of residential houses in the area. There could be certain thumb rules governing the number and configuration of these prefab elements for ensuring the seismic safety of the inhabitants. This would not only ward off the on-site quality control constraints, but also the on-site technical surveillance, which is generally not available in the developing countries, especially at inaccessible terrains. The introduction of these pre-tensioned precast elements could be beneficial considering both the economic as well as the safety aspects of many structures. Considering their lightweight and compactness, they can be easily transported to remote locations, wherein also, not much engineering know-how would be required for their installation. These pre-tensioned elements, when manufactured at a large scale are quite cheap, as compared to wooden bracings, even in the developing countries due to scarcity of wood. Thus, this technique is cost efficient as well as comparatively environment friendly. This would lower the cost of construction and technical manpower needed, especially for the economically challenged classes. It would simultaneously also abate the burden on Government technical authorities to evaluate the earthquake safety of residential structures. Wood (used in the armature cross wall system) undergoes several forms of deterioration, when exposed to sunlight, rain and other extreme climatic conditions. The elements would not be vulnerable to any such damage, and thus have a longer life. Moreover, no electricity or any other heavy machinery like concrete mixers, lifting equipment, etc would be needed, which would further increase its scope of applicability. Thus if intended, they can very easily reach the most inaccessible locations, and ensure quite reasonable seismic safety to the most deprived economic classes as well. V. CONCLUSION It is very clear that the commercialization and dissemination of this technique would be of immense benefit to the public at large, especially to the inhabitants of mountainous regions, which have limited accessibility to technical manpower, quality building material, modern machinery and even electricity. This would ensure their seismic safety through a very economic and practicable approach. Also, it would obviate the need for rigorous seismic health monitoring at the inaccessible terrains, and seismic certification drives done by authorities. VI. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authors would like to thank Mr. Amarpreet Singh, Structural Design Department, RITES Ltd., India, for his sincere and continuous efforts, and Mr. Wajahat Dedmari, President at DW Engineering Inc., Greater Los Angeles, USA for his valuable suggestions.

186

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), IAEME

VII. REFERENCES [1] Sung Jig Kim, Amr S. Elnashai, Characterization of shaking intensity distribution and seismic assessment of RC buildings for the Kashmir (Pakistan) earthquake of October 2005, In Engineering Structures 31(12):2998-3015 [2] Wani Ahmad, Javed Ahmad Bhat, Traditional construction and commonly adopted masonry construction in Kashmir: a comparative study, 14th Symposium on Earthquake Engineering (14SEE-2010) (Dec. 2010) at Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee. [3] Vernacular Housing Construction, Mauro Sassu, University of Pisa, Ital. (Available at www.world-housing.net/uploads/vernacular_construction.pdf) [4] Randolph Langenbach, Learning from the past to protect the future: Armature Crosswalls, Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 20962100, www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct [5] Indigenous Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction: Good practices and Lessons Learned from Experiences in the Asia Pacific Region, Bangkok, July (2008), United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction. [6] Manual for Restoration and Retrofitting of damaged structures in Kashmir, UNO 2006 (Available at kashmirdivision.nic.in/Disaster/Man_res_retro_kmr_Chpt5.pdf) [7] Munshi J, A Low-Cost Housing Option in Seismic Regions, A Low-Cost Housing Option in Seismic Regions, Structures Congress 2009. May 2009, 1-10, American Society of Civil Engineers. [8] IS 883: Design of Structural Timber in Building: Code of Practice. [9] IS 456: Plain and Reinforced Concrete: Code of Practice. [10]IS 1343: Code of Practice for Prestressed Concrete. [11]IS 1785: Part II

187