SSE Earthquake Detailing Document - 01

REINFORCEMENT DETAILING
TO MITIGATE
SEISMIC EFFECTS
SEPTEMBER 2006
Published by
Society of Structural Engineers

Sri Lanka
PREFACE TO FIRST EDITION
Practicing Structural Engineers and Teachers of Structural Engineering at Universities in

Sri Lanka receive many requests from the clients, particularly who invest on high-rise
buildings and on post disaster structures seeking information on a wide range of hazards
and disasters. One of the hazards is an earthquake even though the probability of the
occurrence may be very remote and unpredictable in the Sri Lankan context.
Therefore the Committee of the Society of Structural Engineers – Sri Lanka decided to
publish a book, “Reinforcement Detailing to Mitigate Seismic Effects” containing
guidelines on structural aspects to mitigate damage to buildings. The details proposed in
this book will be of assistance in answering questions related to earthquakes and buildings.
The information contained in this book was researched, written and prepared for
publication by the Society of Structural engineers from various sources including the
authorities acknowledged, and was incorporated into the publication in consultation with
education specialists and practicing Structural Engineers.
As stated above the Society of Structural Engineers – Sri Lanka incorporated in July 1993,
though young, the members of the committee together with the academic staff of the
Engineering Faculties who are also members of the Society have contributed a great deal
of their time and effort to collect valuable information from various sources to publish
books on topics related to the construction industry to help advance the knowledge and
practice of Structural Engineering in Sri Lanka.
Mr S A Karunaratne
BSc Eng, CEng, FIStructE, MICE,FIE-SL
PRESIDENT
Society of Structural Engineers – Sri Lanka
28 November 2006
FOREWORD
The Disaster Management Centre, established by an Act of Parliament in 2005, is the lead
agency for all activities related to disaster risk management in Sri Lanka. One of its
activities is the development of guidelines for construction activities in disaster prone
areas. An advisory committee has identified high winds, coastal flooding (including
tsunamis), earthquakes and landslides as priority areas for developing and enforcing such
guidelines.
Where earthquakes are considered, Sri Lanka is quite distant from a tectonic plate
boundary, thus suggesting that earthquake risk may be low. At the same time, we have in
fact experienced various ground perturbation s in the past. Furthermore, significant
earthquakes have also occurred in intra-plate situations, such as the one I Newcastle,
Australia in 1989. Hence, there is a need to exercise some caution.
It is this need for caution that has resulted in some of our more significant structures being
designed for various ground accelerations. These include important structures of the
Mahaweli Scheme and certain high rise buildings in Colombo. We do not as yet however
have earthquake zoning or recommended design accelerations. Some structural engineers
and clients would also content that our earthquake risk do not justify the additional cost of
designing buildings for earthquakes. In this context, some researches and practitioners
have advocated the concept of introducing earthquake resistance though appropriate
structural form and reinforcement detailing. This may be a via media (middle path) for
those who wish to pursue it.
As such, I wish to commend this publication, by the Society of Structural Engineers, Sri
Lanka, which focuses on this very aspect. The Society of Structural Engineers has been at
the forefront of promoting good practice in structural engineering and also in bringing
together researchers and practitioners. This publication too is a good example of that - the
academic author has a strong research record in tall buildings and earthquake design,
while the practitioner authors are leaders in the art and practice of structural engineering,
and also happen to be the current President and Vice-President of the Society of Structural
Engineers.
In summary then, we in Sri Lanka do not have a definitive requirement for design against
earthquakes. It is an area currently being studied by our Advisory Committee as well.
However, this publication should prove invaluable for those who wish to make some
provision against earthquakes, and the Disaster Management Center has agreed to meet its
printing costs.
Professor Priyan Dias

Chairman, Advisory Committee for the
Development of Guidelines for Construction Activities in Disaster Pone Areas
Disaster Management Centre
Colombo, Sri Lanka
November 2006
Reinforcement Detailing to Mitigate Seismic Effects
1. Introduction
An earthquake is a natural phenomenon, which occurs due to the sudden relative movement of
the earth’s crust. There are two types of earthquakes. One type takes place closer to the plate
boundaries whereas the other type occurs within the plate boundaries. The first type, which is
known as inter - plate earthquakes occur as the accumulated strain energy due to the drift of the
tectonic plates, is released at the plate boundaries. The well known plate boundaries are shown
in the cover of this book. The other type which is called as intra plate earthquakes, takes place
within the tectonic plates and either the location or the magnitude of those cannot be predicted
easily.
As shown in the cover of this book, Sri Lanka is located within a plate, which is known as
“Indo-Australian plate”. Australia, although is a large country, is also located within this plate.
Therefore, earthquakes those occur in both Sri Lanka and Australia will be of intra-plate type.
The importance of this type of earthquakes is that they can occur without much warning or
historical records. One good example for this type of earthquakes is the New Castle earthquake
that occurred in Australia in 1989. Before this earthquake, New Castle, a medium size town, was
considered as a place where no earthquakes can occur.
This has to be true for Sri Lanka as well, since a number of earthquakes were reported in the
recent past in Central India, which is also in the Indo-Australian plate, and closer to Sri Lanka,
which was hitherto considered as seismically inactive. Further, the misconception that Sri Lanka
is located in an area where no earthquakes will occur has been proven wrong in many occasions
at the cost of human life and severe destruction to the infrastructure of an area. For example, the
recent earthquake occurred on 7th December 1993, felt by most Sri Lankans were surprised. The
epicenter of this earthquake was located 170km west of Colombo and the magnitude of the event
was measured as 4.7 on the Richter scale (Abayakoon, 1998).
Historical records indicate that a severe earthquake had affected Colombo in 1615 where an
estimated 200 houses were damaged with a casualty figure of over 2000 (Wimalaratne, 1993).
Abayakoon (1998) has shown that a total of seven earthquakes have occurred with the epicenter
very close to Colombo since 1819, on the basis of data obtained from United States Geological
Survey. These data are reproduced in Table 1. It was also reported by Abayakoon (1998) that 88
earthquakes have occurred around Sri Lanka since 1819, of which the magnitudes varied from
3.0 to 6.0 on the Richter scale. From those, 18 earthquakes were recorded as magnitudes
between 5.0 and 6.0. These earthquakes were recorded within the rectangle of latitude 20-130
north and longitude 760 to 850 east. Sri Lanka lies between 5o 55’ and 9o 51’ north latitude and
79o 43’ and 81o 53’ east longitude. These facts enlighten that it may not be advisable to ignore
earthquakes, in designing low to medium rise buildings in Sri Lanka.
Longitude Latitude Distance to

Year Month Date Magnitude
(East) (North) Colombo Fort (km)
1823 2 9 80.0 7.0 5.7 15
1823 3 9 80.0 7.0 5.0 15
1843 6 19 79.9 6.9 3.0 10
1848 3 - 79.9 6.9 - 10
1857 8 16 80.0 7.0 3.7 15
1866 12 19 80.0 7.0 3.7 15
1871 9 - 79.9 6.9 - 10
Table 1: Earthquakes in the Vicinity of Colombo (Abayakoon, 1998)
-1-
2. Conventional Structures in Sri Lanka
Reinforced concrete frame structures are often used in Sri Lanka for low to medium rise
buildings having 2 to 10 stories. In many towns, reinforced concrete buildings with 4 to 5 stories
are quite often used for business establishments. Two to three storey reinforced concrete frame
buildings are often used for government establishments and schools.
These reinforced concrete framed buildings can be designed based on two methods. When there
are sufficient number of brick infill panels, the frame can be designed as braced, thus carries
only the vertical loads. The infill panels are expected to take the lateral loads. The number of
infill panels required in these buildings with locally available bricks to resist lateral loads should
be selected carefully so that there is a guarantee that the panels will remain intact during the life
span of the building. In buildings where it is not possible to provide sufficient infill panels, due
to reasons like the need to provide adequate openings on external walls, the structures should be
designed as moment resisting frames.
The building regulations adopted in Sri Lanka require the installation of lifts when the number
of stories of a building is more than four (Building Regulations, 1985). Thus, buildings over five
storeys may have concrete shear walls. However, in small buildings, the lift core may be
constructed as reinforced concrete frame braced with infill brickwork.
The reinforcement detailing used in all these buildings is generally based on those recommended
in Standard Method of Detailing Structural Concrete (The Institution of Structural Engineers,
1989). It should be noted that these details do not take sufficient precautions against the cyclic
loading that occur in earthquakes.
-2-
3. Earthquake Resistant Design Criteria
It is generally accepted that earthquake resistant detailing of structures should have a two staged
approach. The first line of defense against earthquakes is the selection of a suitable structural
form. It should be noted that regular structures generally perform better than highly irregular
structures at the event of an earthquake. The second line of defense is the improved
reinforcement detailing, which can enhance the ductility of a structure, to avoid severe damage,
partial or complete collapse. For the improvement of ductility, suitable criteria should be
evaluated critically so that those can be adopted by structural engineers confidently.
The main criteria of designing a building to resist an earthquake (Hutchinson et al, 1995) is that
the building should be able to resist,
- minor earthquakes without damage

- moderate earthquakes without structural damage but with some non-structural damage
- major earthquakes without collapse, but with some structural and non-structural damage
This means that a certain degree of damage is acceptable in a building at an earthquake, but not
the loss of life due to collapse of the structure.
Since the adoption of conservative criteria for earthquake resistant designs can result in costly
structures, a dual design philosophy is generally adopted. In this, the structure is designed for an
earthquake of a reasonable magnitude that can be expected at a site and then, the structure can be
detailed to ensure a sufficient ductility so that in a rare event of a severe earthquake, the chance
of collapse of the building is remote.
As both Sri Lanka and Australia is located on the same tectonic plate Figure 1.1), it is possible
to recommend the Australian Standard AS 1170.4-1993 for evaluating earthquake loads on
buildings those are to be constructed in Sri Lanka. However, since Sri Lanka is located in a low
seismic region a static analysis is adequate for the design.
However, good detailing alone is not sufficient to prevent the collapse of a structure, but a
reasonably good structural form is also needed. It is also required to ensure that adjacent
structures will not cause the collapse of a properly designed building. These aspects are
discussed here in detail with respect to reinforced concrete structures constructed in Sri Lanka.
-3-
4. Desirable Structural Forms and Planning Practice for Reinforced

Concrete Buildings
It should be noted that it is not possible to make a poor structural form behave satisfactorily at
an earthquake only by having good reinforcement arrangements. To have a better performance at
the event of an earthquake a structural form should have most of the characteristics given below
(Dowrick, 1977).
- It should be simple and regular in shape such as square, rectangular, circular, but not T, U or I
shapes.
- Structures having minor re-entrant corners would also be considered as regular but large re-
entrant corners creating a crucifix form would not be desirable since the response of the
wings of this type of structures is generally different from the response of the structure as a
whole. The geometrical irregularities in plan that would not be acceptable for regular
structures as given in AS 1170/4:1993 are shown in Figure 4.1. When the structure is
irregular, it may need to be subjected to dynamic analysis.
- A regular structure should have following properties
1. It should be approximately symmetrical in plan, for example, by having strong elements

arranged symmetrically thus preventing the development of torsional effects.
2. It is not desirable to have too elongated structures either in plan or in elevation.
3. It should have a uniform and continuous distribution of strength in the vertical direction.
4. It is desirable to have horizontal members (beams) which form hinges before the vertical
members (columns)
5. It is advisable to avoid inappropriate detailing of non-structural members.
Above aspects are discussed in detail in Sections 4.1 to 4.7.
4.1 Effects of Shape of the Structure
As stated in Section 4, regular structures of simple shapes has a higher possibility of survival
than an irregular structure at an earthquake. In Sri Lanka, not much attention is paid in this
aspect as architects come up with highly irregular shapes for aesthetic considerations.
Buildings with irregular plan shape with different mass or stiffness distribution should be
separated using seismic joints. A seismic joint can separate building masses so that they can
behave independently. For example, shallow wings of a building with irregular plan shape may
tend to move in a different direction while the deep centre portion may hardly displace as shown
in Figure 4.2(a). These torsional and translational movements will cause large stresses at the
junctions of the wings and the central portion. This can be corrected by providing seismic joints
as shown in Figure 4.2(b).
4.2 Effects of Eccentric Cores
Even regular buildings with an eccentric core as shown in Figure 4.3(a) can be subjected to
torsion since the centre of mass does not coincide with the centre of rigidity. Such buildings can
be improved by constructing them as two separate buildings connected through seismic joints as
shown in Figure 4.3(b). Conversely, it may be advisable to plan the buildings so that strong
elements are located close to the centre.
-4-
4.3 Effect of Elongated Buildings
When the building is elongated in plan, the chances of different earthquake movements being
applied simultaneously to the two ends of the structure are high. This could lead to the
destruction of the structure at an event of an earthquake. When very long buildings are required,
it is advisable to use two buildings of approximately square shape, separated adequately so that
battering of the buildings with each other is prevented. (Dowrick, 1977).
This feature is infrequent in Sri Lanka since the maximum length of buildings are generally
limited to about 60m to avoid expansion joints. In longer buildings, the usual practice is to
divide the building using expansion joints where the gap between the buildings is determined
based on the expected thermal expansion. In Sri Lanka, the average daily fluctuation of
temperature is about 7oC in low altitudes. Therefore, a temperature variation of about 20oC
could often be used for the calculation of thermal expansions. For example, the thermal
expansion that can be expected over a length of 60m, for a temperature rise of 20oC is 12mm
since the coefficient of thermal expansion of concrete is about 10 x 10-6. However, the deflection
associated with an earthquake event may be higher than this value, thus there can be pounding
damage, specially when the two separated parts are of different heights (Figure 6.1).
When the building is elongated in elevation, the structure may cause excessive horizontal
deflections leading to a considerable damage to non-structural members in an earthquake event.
It was reported by Woodside (1995) that the performance of non-structural components such as
finishes and building services would be important since a major portion of repair costs was
associated with non-structural members. Thus, for slender buildings, it is advisable to limit the
height to breadth ratio to less than four (Dowrick, 1977).
4.4 Effect of Strength Distribution
Buildings with irregular distribution of mass and strength can suffer excessive damages at the
locations of such irregularities. In Sri Lanka, many clients request double height lobby areas
with mezzanine floors for elegance. This leads to irregular structural configurations in vertical
direction (Figures 4.4(a) and 4.4(b) illustrate few types of vertical irregularities those can be
integrated in a building). In many past earthquakes like San Fernando, California, 1971,
Erzincan, Turkey, 1992 (Saaticioglu & Bruneau, 1993), and Kobe, Japan, 1995 (Sanders, 1995),
buildings with such irregular distribution of masses and strength have suffered excessive
damages. In many instances, complete elimination of such floors was observed during
earthquakes leading to loss of life. This can be explained as, since the normal height upper floor
areas are much stiffer, they tend to behave as one block. In double height lobby areas, the
columns become slender needing large rotational capacities during earthquakes, which cannot be
provided with columns, those sizes selected considering only the static loads and detailed with
normal detailing practices.
This means that it would be desirable to control the slenderness of columns by providing larger
columns than required when double height lobby areas are essential. Such large columns would
help to reduce deflections and differences in stiffness and hence the rotational deformations in
columns. These columns should be carefully detailed to have sufficient ductility, thus avoiding
brittle failures.
Another source of irregularity is the introduction of large set backs in buildings. Large set backs
introduce sudden changes in mass which may lead to unpredictable force distributions close to
the set backs during an earthquake. Thus, if set backs are essential to ensure lighting angle
requirements, etc. those should be introduced with gradual changes. It is recommended in AS
-5-
1170/4:1993 to have set backs as shown in Figure 4.5. When, such recommendations are
violated, it will be necessary to carry out dynamic analysis to determine the proper force
distribution. However, such an analysis may not be a guarantee for the satisfactory behavior of a
structure at the time of an earthquake.
4.5 Effect of Relative Strength of Beams and Columns
The modern trend in buildings is to maximize the spans while minimizing the number of
columns. This would necessitate beams of considerable depth where the column sizes are kept
relatively small. In the event of an earthquake, the strong beams remain elastic while the weak
columns suffer concrete crushing or shear failure, which may lead to the collapse of the
building. This aspect is not paid much attention either by architects or by design engineers in Sri
Lanka. When long span beams are proposed by architects, structural engineers generally design
deep beams without any hesitation to transfer forces of static nature such as dead, live and wind.
However, this may not be appropriate for dynamic forces that occur in earthquakes.
When long beams are unavoidable, it may be appropriate to use larger columns than required by
axial loads and moments. Such columns with suitable earthquake resistant details will have a
much higher chance of survival than smaller columns.
4.6 Effect of Inappropriate Detailing of Non-structural Members
Occasionally, half storey height masonry walls are used between columns for installing
claddings on external walls. These walls act as bracings for columns up to a mid height of the
floors, which makes the column behave as a shorter column (Figure 6.12) thus absorbing
excessive forces. This is because, due to the bracing effect, the strength shown by the column is
much higher than what it possesses. Thus, when such walls are required, those should be
separated from the column by using suitable flexible materials (Figure 6.33) like bitumen sheets.
These precautions are generally not practiced in Sri Lanka up to now. Damages to external
columns in reinforced concrete buildings due to above effect have been reported by Saatcioglu
and Bruneau (1993), Mitchell & Tinawi (1992).
4.7 Effect of Adjacent Buildings
It is a common feature in many major towns in Sri Lanka to maximize the usage of land extents
due to high land prices. The building regulations adopted in Sri Lanka (Building Regulations,
1985) allows the construction of buildings with blind walls at boundaries. Thus, if two adjacent
buildings are constructed at the same boundary, common to both lands, those will possess two
blind walls touching each other at the boundary. This can lead to pounding or buffeting failures,
even in properly designed buildings at an earthquake.
Specially when buildings with different storey heights and number of storeys are constructed
adjacent to each other, those can oscillate with different periods of vibration leading to stiff floor
diaphragms of one building pounding against columns of the adjacent building at intermediate
heights. This can lead to crushing of columns followed by collapse of buildings. Thus, if it is
required to construct buildings adjacent to each other, it is advisable to have same number of
floors as the adjacent building, with the same storey heights.
If the adjacent buildings are to be constructed separately sufficient gap should be kept between
them depending on the expected deflections that may experience by the buildings during an
earthquake. It should be noted that the behaviour of a building may be of dynamic nature and the
building will be in plastic state and not in elastic state as assumed for lateral load analysis, at the
-6-
time of an earthquake. Thus, the deflections that can be expected under earthquake loads need to
be determined with reasonable accuracy. An adequate guidance for this can be found in AS
1170/4:1993. In this code, a parameter kd (deflection amplification factor) is introduced for most
types of structures so that the deflection of a structure under dynamic loads can be calculated by
multiplying the deflection obtained for equivalent static loads using an elastic analysis.
Deflection amplification factor, kd vary between 4 to 5 for most of the structures.
For example, if a five storey building of 20m height is to be constructed with a drift index
(deflection/height) of 1/500, as used for low to medium rise buildings (Irwin, 1984), the
maximum allowable elastic deflection will be 40mm. Such buildings can have a deflection of
about 200mm (40 x 5 mm) in an earthquake event. Thus, a separation of 400 mm between two
adjacent five storey reinforced concrete buildings will be desirable.
The building regulations (Building Regulations, 1985) adopted in Sri Lanka requires a minimum
distance of 0.8m from the boundary for access and maintenance requirements, when blind walls
are to be built away from the boundary. This is sufficient in most of the low to medium rise
buildings up to ten storeys to prevent pounding damage to existing buildings constructed with
blind walls. However, it is advisable to calculate the maximum dynamic deflection as a general
practice before adopting the minimum gap of 0.8m recommended in building regulations.
A/L>0.15 A/L>0.15
A/L>0.15
Figure 4.1: Geometrically symmetric Irregular Structures
Siesmic Joints
Figure 4.2(a): Building with Shallow Wings Figure 4.2(b) Shallow Wings Separated from the
and Center Core Center Core by Seismic Joints
-7-
Siesmic Joints
Figure 4.3(a): Building with an Eccentric Figure 4.3(b): Shallow Wings Separated from the
Core Center Core by Seismic Joints
Figure 4.4(a): Vertical Irregularities due to Different Adjacent Storey Heights
Figure 4.4(b): Vertical Irregularities due to Different Mass Distributions in Adjacent Stories
A/L>0.3 A/L>0.15
A A A/L>0.15
L L L L L
Figure 4.5: Vertical Irregularities due to Set Backs
-8-
5. Detailing of Structures for Enhanced Ductility

It was reported by Sanders (1995) that the poor performance of buildings at an earthquake was
generally due to the combination of following reasons.
- Inadequate strength and stiffness of the overall seismic resisting system

- Poor distribution of strength and stiffness over successive storeys
- Lack of provision for an adequate load path through the structure
- Poor detailing of joints and connections leading to various types of non-ductile failures
It was shown with non-linear dynamic analysis of multi-storey structures that the columns could
be subjected to changes in the location of point of contraflexure or even single curvature
bending leading to increases in the bending moments (Park & Paulay, 1975). The reason for this
unexpected distribution of column bending moments at some instants is the strong influence of
higher modes of vibration, particularly second and third modes. These high moments may lead
to plastic hinges forming in columns, which can lead to crushing of concrete in columns if
normal reinforcement details are provided. Such crushing of concrete can lead to destruction of
columns causing the collapse of the building. Thus, column reinforcement and location of splice
bars may need special care with respect to preventing such failures.
Further, an earthquake can cause vertical accelerations in buildings, which can induce moment
reversals in beams. The change of point of contraflexure in columns can contribute to this as
well. Thus, beams should be provided with some reverse moment capacity, which means the
ability of sections subjected primarily to sagging, to resist hogging moments and vice versa.
Due to the cyclic nature of the loading during an earthquake, beam column junctions will be
subjected to extra shear forces and tensile stresses that may not exist with static loads. Therefore,
beam column junction also need extra precautions in detailing to prevent crushing failure of
concrete (Mendis and Goldworthy, 1995).
-9-
6. Reinforcement Detailing
The main reasons as reported by Sanders (1995) for the poor performance of buildings at an
earthquake include, the inadequate strength and stiffness of the seismic resisting system, poor
distribution of strength and stiffness in successive storeys and lack of provision for an adequate
load path through the structure. These facts can be considered in the preliminary analysis and
design stage of a building.
A reasonable approach for mitigating the seismic effects by proper reinforcement details at
joints and connections, which enhance the ductility at such locations, is summarized in this
section.
6.1 General Considerations
Some general rules that can be followed at the planning stage of a building for a higher
probability of survival at an earthquake is described in following sections
6.1.1 Desirable Planning of Buildings
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR MULTI-

STOREY BUILDINGS
Gaps between adjacent buildings

a) Up to 6m height gap >= 30mm
b) Add 10mm for each 3m increment thereafter
Cantilevers or Balconies
a) Limit cantilevers to a max. of 1.5m & tie back
with beams and provide bottom R/F.
b) If possible avoid cantilevers
Soft storeys
a) Avoid soft storeys if possible
Note 6.1: Desirable Planning of Buildings
Failures of structures due to avoiding the facts described in Note 6.1 is shown in Figures 6.2 to
6.4.
- 10 -
6.1.1.1 Effect of Gaps between Adjacent Buildings
Insufficient gap creates Adequate gap prevents

pounding pounding
Figure 6.1: Pounding of Buildings
Damage due
to pounding
created by
inadequate
gap between
buildings
Figure 6.2: Failure of Buildings due to Pounding
- 11 -
6.1.1.2 Effect on Cantilevers and Balconies
COLLAPSE OF BALCONIES
WITH NO TIE BACK
Figure 6.3: Failure of a Balcony
6.1.1.3 Effect of Soft Stories
COLUMN FAILURE DUE TO SOFT STOREY
Figure 6.4: Failure due to Soft Storey Effect
- 12 -
6.1.2 Desirable Structural Forms
(a) Columns should not rest (a) Where a column rests on a beam
on cantilever beams supported at both ends; combined
vertical loads acting on beam should
(b) Columns should not rest
be increased by 50%.
on nibs of columns underneath
(b) Adjacent beams & columns should be
treated similarly
(a) Where both ends of a wall rests (a) Structural walls should not rest on
on columns underneath; combined beam span at any storey
vertical loads acting on columns
should be increased by 50%.
Special conditions
Note 6.2: Desirable Structural Forms
6.1.3 Properties of Materials
Material strengths
To maintain high ductility levels and
avoid brittle conditions, use:
Concrete C16/20 up to C40/50 could be used
Reinforcement of characteristic yield strength,
fy > 460N/mm2 shall not be used
Rupture strain of reinforcement shall be >= 10%
Average yield strength from tests <=1.3 fy
Average rupture strength from tests >=1.25 fy
Butt welds in main reinforcement and welding of

transverse to longitudinal reinforcement should
be avoided
Note 6.3: Material Properties for Higher Ductility
- 13 -
6.2 Member Sizes and Reinforcement Detailing
Following guidelines can be generally followed in selecting member dimensions and

reinforcement detailing to mitigate seismic effects by enhancing the ductility of the structure at
the event of an earthquake.
6.2.1 Stirrups
Stirrups & Crossties

Stirrups shall always have 1350 hooks at both ends
Crossties may have a 900 hook and a 1350 hook

at the other end for easy fixing
Crossties should be alternatively staggered both

horizontally and vertically in structural elements
Diameter (Φ) of Stirrups and crossties should be

same
Length of hook measured from tangent point
should be
>= 10Φ and 100mm for plain bars and
>= 6Φ and 80mm for ribbed bars
Note 6.4: Desirable Shapes for Links
o
135
Dia >=
5φ hoop >=6Φ (10Φ )
>=80mm (100mm)
Values given in ( ) are for mild
steel reinforcement)
o
135
Φ - Dia. Of cross tie
90 o 135 o
Stirrup or hoop Crosstie
Stirrups & crossties for columns, beam-column joints
beam confinement zones and wall end zones
Shape of stirrups & crossties
Figure 6.5: Desirable Shapes for Links
- 14 -
Failure at foot of column due to 900 hook

of link
Figure 6.6: Failure of Column due to Undesirable Links
6.2.2 Columns
6.2.2.1 Column Dimensions
Column sizing
(1) Shorter dimension of column bmin >= 250mm
(2) Cross sectional area of column >= 75000mm2

(3) Diameter of circular columns >= 300mm
(4) Ac >= Ndmax/(0.50 fck)

Where
Ac - Cross sectional area of column
Ndmax - Greater of the factored axial forces
under vertical loads only and under
simultaneous vertical and seismic loads
fck - Cylinder strength of concrete
(5) bmin / bmax >= 0.4
Note 6.5: Selection of Column Dimensions
- 15 -
Column sizing ctd
(1) b >= 250mm
(2) bh >= 75000mm2
h (3) Φ >= 300mm
(4) Ac >= Ndmax / (0.50fck)

Φ
(5) h / b <= 4 Φ
Rectangular column Circular column
Figure 6.7: Selection of Column Dimensions (Summary)
6.2.2.2 Column Reinforcement
Column – Vertical R/F arrangement

(a) 1. Asc >=1% and <=4% of bmaxxbmin
2. At laps Asc max. <=6% of bmaxxbmin Asc – Area
3. Minimum reinforcement for of main R/F
rectangular columns - 4Y16
circular columns - 6Y16
(b) The best location for tension laps is the column
central zone and laps shall be >= l for tension bars,
where l is the tension lap specified in BS 8110
(C) If 50% of vertical R/F is lapped at the bottom
end of column lap shall be >= 1.25 l
(d) If more than 50% of vertical R/F is lapped at the

bottom end of column lap shall be >= 1.5 l
Note 6.6: Arrangement of Reinforcement in a Column
- 16 -
Column – Vertical R/F

arrangement
1. Where beams frame into all four 2. All other joints are defined
sides of a column; each beam width 2 as unconfined
>= 3/4 of adjoining column width;
is defined as confined joint
ln/2
(a) > 50% R/F lapped Structurally
0.5l Best location
(b) <= 50% R/F lapped ln
0.5l for R/F lap
Practically (a) 1.5l ln/2
Best location (b) 1.25l
for R/F lap
Figure 6.8: Desirable Reinforcement Detailing for Columns (Summary)
Column – Vertical R/F arrangement

at section changes
(a) Slope of vertical R/F within the beam-column
joint should be less than 1/6 with respect to
the vertical
(b)When the required slope is greater than 1/6,

provide new R/F with anchorage length>= 1.5 l
& >=40Φ to replace the discontinued R/F, where
φ is the diameter of new R/F.
(C) R/F which are discontinued should have
anchorage lengths >= 1.5 l & >=40Φ.
If required provide 900 bends. The length of
horizontal and/or vertical bar end >= 12 Φ,
where φ is the diameter of new R/F.
Note 6.7: Arrangement of Reinforcement in a Column
- 17 -
>= 6 c
b e a b e a
e >= 1.5 l
e >= 40 Φ
(a+b) >= 1.5 l (a+b+c) >= 1.5 l
(a+b) >= 40 Φ (a+b+c) >= 40 Φ
b >= 12 Φ c >= 12 Φ
R/F arrangement where column section change
Figure 6.9: Desirable Reinforcement Detailing at Section Changes of Columns
Column – Transverse R/F Arrangement

(a) Column confinement zone shall be taken as greater
than the largest of 500mm, ln/6 or bmax,
(refer Figure 6.8 for ln)
(b) In column confinement zones and at laps,
- spacing of links/crossties shall be
- less than 100mm and 1/3bmin
- greater than 50mm
- dia. of links/crossties shall be greater than 8mm
- lateral distance between legs shall be lesser than
25 times the diameter of leg.
(c) In column central zone,
- spacing of links/crossties shall be
- less than 200mm and 1/2 bmin
- dia. of links/crossties shall be greater than 8mm.
- lateral distance between legs shall be lesser than
25 times the diameter of leg.
Note 6.8: Arrangement of Stirrups in a Column
- 18 -
Column – Transverse R/F

arrangement
At least 60% of transverse
R/F provided in the
confinement zone
below to be provided Si <=100mm Unconfined joint
along the height of the
shallowest beam
Sc<=100mm; Column confinement zone
>=50mm; <=bmin/3 >=bmax; >=ln/6; >=500mm
So <=200mm; <=bmin/2
Detail X Column central zone ln
o5 o5 o1 o2 o1
bmax
o4 o3
bmin
o4 o3
X Column confinement zone
Omax = 25 times the dia. of transverse R/F
>=bmax; >=ln/6; >=500mm
At least 40% of
transverse R/F Si <=150mm Confined joint
provided in confinement
zone below
Figure 6.10: Desirable Arrangement of Stirrups for Columns (Summary)
Column link arrangement at laps

d = 2Φ
b = 10 Φ
Φ
Double links at bends Crank detail
Links at laps as in the

confinement zones
Link arrangement
at laps in columns
Figure 6.11: Desirable Arrangement of Stirrups at Laps
- 19 -
Short column created by opening
ln = length of
short column
Minimum stirrups for a column confinement zone

extended to full height of column
Figure 6.12: Arrangement of Stirrups to Mitigate Short Column Effect
COLUMN FAILURE DUE TO

INSUFFICIENT LAPS & STIRRUPS
Figure 6.13: Failure of Column at an Earthquake
- 20 -
COLUMN FAILURE AT CONFINEMENT ZONE
Figure 6.14: Failure of Column at an Earthquake
COLUMN FAILURE & TOTAL COLLAPSE
Figure 6.15: Total Failure of a Building at an Earthquake due to Column Failure
- 21 -
Damage to column
Short column effect
Figure 6.16: Failure of Columns due to Short Column Effect
6.2.3 Beams
6.2.3.1 Beam Dimensions
Beam sizing
(1) Width of beams should be
- greater than 250mm
- lesser than or equal to beam depth + width of
column in perpendicular direction to beam axis
(2) Depth of beams should be
- greater than the larger of 3 x slab thickness & 300mm
- lesser than 3.5 x the beam width
(3) Depth of beams should be

- lesser than ¼ of clear span
- if the depth is higher than this, side bars should be
provided according to clause 3.12.5.4 of BS 8110
As sides >= 30% x greater of (As top +As bottom) at right or left support
(4) Limitations (1), (2) & (3) do not apply to coupling beams of
coupled walls and secondary beams outside beam-column
joints
Note 6.9: Selection of Beam Dimensions
- 22 -
Beam sizing ctd

ts bb wc
hc
hb
ln
(1). bb >= 250mm & <= hb + wc
(2). hb >= 3ts or 300mm & <= 3.5bb
(3). hb <= 1/4 ln; if > use side bars

Total area of side bars >= (4). Conditions (1),
(2) & (3) do not apply
30% x greater of(As top + As bottom)
to coupled beams &
at right or left support secondary beams
Figure 6.17: Selection of Beam Dimensions (Summary)
6.2.3.2 Beam Reinforcement
Beams – Longitudinal R/F requirements

(a) At least 25% of the maximum top R/F at supports
on either side of a span should extend continuously
along the full length of beam
(b) At discontinuous ends bottom & top R/F of beams
should extend to the exterior face of column and
bent at 900.
(c) In continuous beams bottom R/F should extend a
lap length “l” into the adjacent span.
(d) R/F of beams connected to walls can be straight
bars without bends and extend a distance equal or
greater than the greater of a lap length or 50
times bar diameter.
(e) Do not lap splice within beam confinement zone (2hk)
or at mid-span. At splices provide links at ¼hk or
100mm, which ever is lesser. Ctd.
Note 6.10: Arrangement of Reinforcement in a Beam
- 23 -
(f) Minimum support top R/F ratio ρ >= fctd / fyd

where,
Fctd- Design tensile strength of concrete
Fyd - Design yield strength of longitudinal R/F
(g) The minimum diameter of bars to be 12mm and at

least two continuous bars to be provided at top and
bottom.
(h) Bottom R/F at supports to be >= 50% of top R/F at
same support in severe seismic zones. This could be
reduced to >= 30% in other zones.
(i) Percentage of top support or bottom span R/F to be
<= 2% or as given in BS 8110.
(j) 30% x Greater area of Ast (top + bottom) of right or
left support should be provided as side bars of a
deep beam. Diameter of side bars to be >= 12mm
and spacing <= 250mm.
Note 6.11: Arrangement of Reinforcement in a Beam
Beam longitudinal R/F arrangement
1/4 of max. support R/F

a
b
b
>= l Bottom R/F of adjacent >= l (a+b)>=l
a
span
a>= 0.4 l
ln b>=12 Φ
Wall
>= l
>= 50 Φ
Note: Do not provide bent-up bars
Figure 6.18: Arrangement of Reinforcement in a Beam
- 24 -
Beams – Transverse R/F requirements

(a) From column face a distance of 2hk is beam
confinement zone and seismic links are required
(b) 1. The maximum distance to the first link from
column face to be less than 50mm
2. Spacing of links in confinement zone Sk to be
less or equal to the lesser of hk/4,150mm,
8 x Dia. of longitudinal R/F or 24 x Dia. of links
(c) At splices provide links at ¼hk or 100mm, whichever
. is the lesser.
(d) Links in other areas of a beam to be <= lesser of
hk/2 or spacing calculated according to BS 8110
(e) Crossties alternatively staggered in locations

where fixing of links are practically difficult.
Note 6.12: Arrangement of Links in a Beam
Beam– Transverse R/F

arrangementss <=<= 8Φh /4 ( Φ =min. longitudinal rebar diameter)
k
k k
sk <= 150mm
sk <= 24Φ ( Φ =Diameter of stirrup)
<= 50mm sk
hk
Beam Beam
confinement Beam central zone confinement
zone (Min. links <= 12 Φ zone
= 2hk <= 300mm, <= hk/2) = 2hk
50mm
Side bars Crossties

alternatively
Beam with staggared with
closed links combination of
closed links
Figure 6.19: Arrangement of Links in a Beam
- 25 -
Beam R/F detailing Ctd.

Lap Link spacing <= 150mm
Do not lap here Do not lap here
Do not lap here
Links at laps in beams
Straight beam bars at

Cranked beam bars at
column do carry
column do not carry
designed tension force
designed tension force
Poor practice Good practice
Figure 6.20: Arrangement of Links in a Beam
SHEAR FAILURE OF A BEAM
Figure 6.21: Shear Failure of a Beam at an Earthquake
- 26 -
6.2.4 Walls
6.2.4.1 Wall Dimensions
Wall sizing
(1) A vertical member of which the ratio of lager to
smaller dimension, lw/bw >=7, is defined as a wall
(2) (a) Wall thickness bw to be >= 1/15 x storey height or

200mm; and
(b) Where Hw/lw>2.0 and bw>= 1/12 x Hcr
where, Hcr - storey height along critical wall height
measured from foundation level
Hw - total wall height
Consider larger of Hcr >= lw or >= Hw/6 limiting to a

maximum of Hcr< 2lw
Wall sizing ctd
Note 6.13: Selection of Wall Dimensions
Wall sizing ctd

(3) Wall end zone (lu) should be >= 0.20 lw and >= 2bw at
the critical wall height Hcr
(4) Wall end zone (lu) should be >= 0.10 lw and >= bw
above the critical wall height Hcr
(5) When wall carries full seismic load from full height;
bw >=1/20 x highest storey height and 150mm
provided both following conditions are satisfied
(i) ΣAg/ ΣAp>= 0.002 (ii) Vt/ ΣAg<= 0.5fctd where,
ΣAg = Sum of sectional areas of walls in all stories
ΣAp = Sum of plan area of all storeys
fctd = Design tensile strength of concrete
Vt = Base shear
Note 6.14: Selection of Wall Dimensions
- 27 -
Wall sizing ctd
Wall end Wall end (1) lw >= 7bw

zone lu Wall web zone lu
(2a) bw >= 1/15 storey height & 200mm
bw
A1 A1 (2b) bw >= 1/12 storey height at Hcr
lw
(3) At Hcr; lu >= 2bw & >= 0.20 lw
Wall end Wall end
zone lu Wall web zone lu (4) Above Hcr; lu >= bw & >= 0.10 lw
(5) bw >= 1/20 highest storey height &

A3>=A1
bw 150mm where full seismic load is carried
along full height of building, provided
A2>=A1
Σ Ag/Σ Ap >= 0.002 & Vt/Σ Ag <= 0.5fctd
Figure 6.22: Selection of Wall Dimensions (Summary)
6.2.4.2 Wall Reinforcement
Walls – R/F arrangement

Top end zone vertical R/F <=250mm
Wall - top end zone
>=0.001bwlw
a
provide min. of 4Y16
s <=bw
s <=200mm
min. Dia. of stirrups/
Critical wall
crossties to be 8mm
a height Hcr
>=0.002bwlw s <=bw/2
s <=100mm
provide min. of 4Y16
s >=50mm
Bot. end zone vertical R/F
Wall - bot. end zone
lw >= 7bw
Wall end Wall web Wall end

zone lu zone lu
bw
Section a - a
Figure 6.23: Arrangement of Reinforcement in a Wall (Summary)
- 28 -
o o<=25Φ link
bw
lu lu
lu>=2 bw Along the critical >= 10 nos/m2
lu>=0.2 lw wall height seismic crossties
Area in
lu>=bw Outside the critical >= 4 nos/m2 elevation
lu>=0.1 lw wall height seismic crossties
bw
Area >= bw lw
where,
l - lap length
>=(lu + l) >=(lu + l) lu - length of
end zone
Figure 6.24: Arrangement of Stirrups / Crossties in a Wall (Summary)
Coupling beam R/F

C A b
h Φ − dia. of
α links
Φ>=8mm
>=1.5 l s<=6 Φ
s<=100mm >=b/2
Wall A Wall >=b/5

ln
Coupling Beam (CB) Section A - A
Where ln /h <=3 & Where ln /h >3 &

Vu>4(fcu)1/2Acp Vu<=1.5bdfctd Vu - factored shear force
provide diagonal provide following fctd - design tensile strength of concrete
stiffener beams (1) b/h>= 0.3 Acp - Cross sectional area at A-A
with R/F in each (2) b>= 250mm fcu - design compressive strength of
As=Vu/(2fysin α ) (Provide normal R/F) concrete
Figure 6.25: Arrangement of Reinforcement in a Coupling Beam at a Wall (Summary)
- 29 -
6.2.5 Foundations / Piles
Foundations/Piles - R/F arrangement

(a) Column confinement R/F should be extended into a
foundation mat to a distance >= 2bmin. or 300mm,
where bmin is the smaller dimension of column
(b) In cast in-situ piles, provide longitudinal R/F >=0.8%

within 1/3 of the pile length under the pile cap, but
not less than 3m. If no lateral support from soil or
if the pile is in air or water, provide above R/F
through the entire unsupported length.
(c) Diameter of spiral R/F>=8mm and pitch<=200mm

which shall be reduced to 100mm within a distance
equal to twice the pile diameter from the top. For
pre-cast piles use R/F >=1.0% and stirrups as for
in-situ piles.
Note 6.15: Arrangement of Reinforcement in a Pile
Tie beams in both directions
Provide Sectional area of beam >= 75000mm2, h >= 300; b >= 250
a Min. where h - beam depth
of 4Y16 b - beam width
sk 2pΦ =
2Φ p 100mm R/F for bored piles
Min. >= 0.8% of Ac
1/3lp sk(1/3lp-2pΦ)
>=3m = 200mm Circular Pile
Theoratically
sk(lp-1/3lp)
main R/F is
<= 12 Φ R/F for pre-cast piles
not required Min. >= 1.0% of Ac
Rectangular Pile
lp = length of pile
φ p = dia. of pile
Elevation of Pile
Figure 6.26: Arrangement of Reinforcement in a Pile (Summary)
- 30 -
Foundation Tie Beams (TB) Table 1; Ground Acc. A0 and
1. Pad footings and pile caps; TB in both directions Seismic Zones

A0 Seismic Zone
2. Wall footings or cts. footings; TB to connect 0.40 1
3. TB location; bottom of pad or bottom of column 0.30 2
0.20 3
4. TB may be replaced by thick slabs >= 150mm
0.10 4
provided that the slab & R/F transfer TB force
Table 3; Minimum requirements for Tie Beams (TB) Table 2; LOCAL SITE CLASSES
MINIMUM Soil Soil Soil Soil Local Soil Group to Table 3 & Topmost
SZ Group Group Group Group Site
REQUIREMENT Layer Thickness (h1)
(A) (B) (C) (D) Class
1 Axial force of the 1,2 %6 %6 %6 %6 Soil Group (A); [SG (A) -Table A ]
SC1
tie beam 3,4 %4 %4 %4 %4 SG (B) with h1 <= 15m
2 X-section 1,2 250 250 300 300 SG (B) with h1 > 15m
SC2
dimension (mm) 3,4 250 250 250 250 SG (C) with h1 <= 15m
3 X-section area 1,2 62500 75000 90000 90000 SG (C) with 15m <h1<= 50m
2 SC3
(mm ) 3,4 62500 62500 75000 75000 SG (D) with h1 <= 10m
4 Longitudinal R/F 1,2 4Φ 16 4Φ 16 4Φ 16 4Φ 20 SG (C) with h1 > 50m
SC4
3,4 4Φ 16 4Φ 16 4Φ 16 4Φ 16 SG (D) with h1 > 10m
% of greatest axial force of column connected by TB Colombo could be considered in
X-section dimension >= 1/30 of the clear span of TB Site Class SC3 & marginally SC4
Dia. of TB hoops >= 8mm ; spcing <= 200mm
Note 6.16: Minimum Requirements for Tie Beams at Foundations
FOUNDATION FAILURE
Figure 6.27: Failure of a Foundation at an Earthquake
6.2.6 Slabs
- 31 -
SLAB REINFORCEMENT
L1 L2 L3
1L1 0.5L1 0.1L3 0.2L3 0.2L2 0.1L2
or or or
Cantilever 0.2L2 0.1L2 0.1L2 0.2L2 0.2L3 0.1L3 0.1L3 0.2L3
top steel (At)
0.1L3 0.1L3
50% span steel 50% span steel
Min 50%At Full tension Main span Full tension Main span Full tension
bond length steel bond length steel bond length
Internal End supports &
Cantilever Span support single span slabs
Figure 6.28: Arrangement of Reinforcement in Slabs (Summary)
Damage due to insufficient anchorage of

floor slabs into supporting elements
Figure 6.29: Failure of a Slab at an Earthquake
6.2.7 Load Bearing Walls
- 32 -
LOAD BEARING WALLS

Beam=Wall width
1. LBW should be one over the other
hb >=200mm
Preferable arrangements; 2. 3. & 4. Horizo
Bond h <=3000mm
2. Regular, symmetric floor plans
Beams
3. Avoid partial basements
4. Tie back cantilevers h <=3000mm
5.i.Cement/Sand mortar by volume 1:4
5.ii. Cement/Lime/Sand ratio 1:2:9 h <=3000mm
2
6. Material Comp. Strength >=5N/mm
Earthquake direction
How to determine length of LB walls Max. 1.5m
ld >= 0.25 AI m/m2 where;
ld : Length of coloured area (m)
Vertical Bond
A : Gross floor area (m2) excluding cantilevers
Beams
I : Building Importance Factor
Purpose of Occupancy or type of Building BIF

(I)
1. Buildings utilised after earthquake & 1.5
building containing hazardous material
2. Intensively & long-term occupied or 1.4
buildings preserving valuable goods
3. Intensively but short-term occupied 1.2
4. Other buildings 1.0 Max. 3m
Note 6.17: Arrangement and Dimensions of Load Bearing Walls
min. R/F links

l1 l2 l3 l4 >= 200mm; 4Y10, 8mm at <=250mm
Unsupported wall lengths: l1, l2, l3 & l4

<= 5.5m (SZ1)
<= 7.0m (SZ2, 3 & 4)
Fig. 1 Wall with cross walls
<=4.0m <=4.0m
VBB VBB VBB

<= 16.0m >= 200mm; 4Y12, 8mm at <=200mm
Fig. 2 Wall without cross walls Fig. 5 Wall with VBB & HBB
>=1.5m SZ1 & 2 >=1.0m >=1.2m SZ1 & 2 >=0.8m
>=1.0m SZ3 & 4 >=0.8m >=0.5m >=0.8m SZ3 & 4 >=0.64m >=0.4m
lb1 lb2 lb1 lb2
lb1 & lb2 <= 3.0m lb1 & lb2 <= 3.0m
(lb1 + lb2) <= 0.4ln (lb1 + lb2) <= 0.4ln
ln (Unsupported wall length) ln (Unsupported wall length)
Fig. 3 Wall with openings Fig. 4 Wall with openings & VBB
Where, VBB – vertically bonded beam

HBB – horizontally bonded beam
Figure 6.30: Arrangement and dimensions of Load Bearing Walls
- 33 -
>=200mm or >= 0.15% lc

Min. 4Y10
Clear Span of opening lc <= 250mm
X Section & All R/F same as in HBB min. dia. 8mm
Lintel <= 250mm

<= 250mm
Min. 4Y10
min.dia.8mm >=50 φ
>=50 φ Wall width
<= 250mm
>= 200mm φ - dia. Of main R/F

Min. 4 φ 10
Horizontal Bond Beam (HBB)
Figure 6.31: Requirements of Horizontally Bonded Beams
Seismic Storyes Natural Concrete Brick Others

Zone Permitted Stone (mm) (mm) (Thickness) (mm)
Basement 500 250 1 200
1,2,3,4
Ground Flr 500 - 1 200
Basement 500 250 1.5 300
1,2,3,4 Ground Flr 500 - 1 200
First Flr - - 1 200
Basement 500 250 1.5 300
Ground Flr 500 - 1.5 300
2,3,4
First Flr - - 1 200
Second Flr - - 1 200
Basement 500 250 1.5 300
Ground Flr 500 - 1.5 300
4 First Flr - - 1.5 300
Second Flr - - 1 200
Third Flr - - 1 200
Additional penthouse of 25% area of a floor can be built
If number of basement more than one, reduce one floor
Table A - Min. Thickness of

Load-Bearing Walls
Note 6.18: Dimensions of Load Bearing Walls
- 34 -
COLLAPSE OF A L B W BUILDING
Figure 6.32: Failure of a Building Load Bearing Walls at an Earthquake
6.2.8 Non Load Bearing Walls
6.2.8.1 Stiffening of Non Load Bearing Walls
TYPICAL STIFFENER BEAM/COLUMN ARRANGEMENT
Figure 6.34: Arrangement of Stiffener Columns and Beams
- 35 -
Figure 6.35: Details of Stiffener Columns and Beams
Figure 6.36: Anchoring Details of Masonry Walls to Reinforced Concrete Beams
- 36 -
6.2.9 Adobe Buildings
ADOBE BUILDINGS
Adobe buildings should be constructed:
1. Only when BIF I = 1
2. Rectangular, symmetric or nearly symmetric & single storied
3. Height <= 2.7m from ground to rooftop
4. Basement height <= 2.4m, Avoid partial basements.
5. Wall rubble foundation thickness >= 500mm & depth >= 800mm from
ground level & extend 500mm above external ground level.
6. Basement rubble wall thickness >= 600mm.
7. External wall thickness 1.5 brick size & internal 1 brick size
8. Mortar; Cement/Sand - 1:4 or Cement/ lime/sand - 1:2:9 by volume
Soil Group Soil Group Soil Group

Requirement (A), (B) (C) (D)
Minimum foundation width in mm 500 600 700
Protrution width (from both sides) to be 2 x 150 2 x 200 2 x 250
added to wall thickness in mm
Minimum foundation height in mm 300 400 400
Minimum top & bottom longitudinal R/F 3Y12 3Y16 4Y16
Minimum hoops spacing at foundation in mm Y8@300 Y8@300 Y8@300
Minimum lateral spacing of steps in mm 1000 1500 -
Minimum step overlapping length in mm 300 400 -
Maximum step height in mm 300 300 -
Adobe Buildings are buildings made with sun dried bricks
Note 6.19: Requirements of an Adobe Building
TOTAL DAMAGE TO ADOBE BUILDINGS
Figure 6.36: Failure of an Adobe Building at an Earthquake
- 37 -
7. References
1. Abayakoon, S. B. S. (1998), “Seismic response of low lying areas in Colombo, Sri Lanka”,
Engineer, Journal of Institution of Engineers, Vol xxviii, No 2, pp 29-36.
2. AS 1170.4 - 1993, Minimum design loads on structures - Part 4: Earthquake Loads,

Standards Australia, New South Wales, 61 p.
3. AS 3600 - 1994, Concrete Structures, Standards Australia, New South Wales, 154 p.
4. Building Regulations (1985), City of Colombo Development Plan, Volume II, Colombo
Municipal Council, 74 p.
5. CP 3: Chapter V: Part 2: 1972, Code of basic data for the design of buildings, Wind loads,
BSI, London.
6. Dowrick, D. J. (1977), Earthquake resistant design, John Wiley & Sons, Grate Britain, p.
373.
7. Hutchinson, G. L., Pham, L., Wilson, J. L. (1995), “Earthquake resistant design of concrete
structures - An introduction for the practicing engineer”, in Earthquake, Steel reinforcement
institute of Australia, pp 3-11.
8. Irwin, A. W., (1984), Design of shear wall buildings, CIRIA Report 102, London, pp 80.
9. Jayasinghe, M.T.R., Jayatunga, P.T.P (1998), “Guidelines for framed buildings braced with
brick wall infills”, Transactions Part 2- Institution of Engineers, Sri Lanka, pp 45 - 57.
10. Mendis, P., Goldsworthy, H. (1995), “Earthquake resistant design of concrete structures: The
state of the art”, in Earthquake - Earthquake resistant design for reinforced concrete
structures, Steel reinforcement institute of Australia, pp 12-32.
11. Mitchell, D., Tinawi, R. (1992), “Structural damage due to the April 22, 1991, Costa Rican
earthquake”, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol 19, No 4, pp 586-605.
12. Park, R., Paulay, T. (1975), Reinforced concrete structures, Wiley Interscience, New York,
p. 805.
13. Perera D.F.U., Jayasinghe, M.T.R. (1998), “Cost increases due to earthquake resistant
detailing”, Research Monograph, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Moratuwa,
Moratuwa, Sri Lanka.
14. Pinto, P. E. (1987), (Ed), Seismic design of concrete structures, Comite’ Euro-International
de B’eton (CEB), Gower Technical Press, England, 298 p.
15. Saaticioglu, M., Bruneau, M. (1993), “Performance of structures during the 1992 Erzincan
earthquake”, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol 20, No 2, pp 305-325.
16. Sanders, P. T. (1995), “Design and detailing for seismic resistance - An Australian
perspective”, in Earthquake - Earthquake resistant design for reinforced concrete structures,
Steel Reinforcement Institute of Australia, pp 33-41.
- 38 -
17. The Institution of Structural Engineers (1989), Standard Method of Detailing Structural
Concrete, London.
18. Uniform building Code (UBC), (1985), International Conference of Building Officials,
Whittier, California.
19. Wimalaratne, K. D. (1993), “The first earthquake recorded in Sri Lanka”, Daily News, 23rd
December.
20. Woodside, J. W. (1995), “Kobe and the consultants view”, in Earthquake - Earthquake
resistant design for reinforced concrete structures, Steel Reinforcement Institute of Australia,
pp 42-46.
21. Specification for structures to be built in disaster areas – Part III – Earthquake disaster
prevention (1998), Ministry of public works and settlement, Government of Republic of
Turkey.
- 39 -
© Society of Structural Engineers, Sri Lanka
Published by:
Society of Structural Engineers, Sri Lanka
Professional Centre
Organization of Professional Associations
275/75 Prof. Stanley Wijesundara Mawatha
Colombo 07
Tel: +94-11-2598120
Email: ssesl@sltnet.lk
Comments and queries are welcome
ISBN 955-9347-03-9
- 40 -
ACKOWLADGEMENT
Cooperation given by Eng. W J B Shiromal Fernando, Managing Director/Structural Engineer,

Civil and Structural Engineering Consultants (Pvt) Ltd. and W M V P K Jayasena, Structural
Engineer, Design Consortium Ltd., in editing the report, is highly acknowledged by the
Executive committee of Society of Structural Engineers. Executive committee also thanks the
Disaster Management Centre for funding for the publication.
DRAFTING COMMITTEE
- Eng. S A Karunaratna, Managing Director, Stems Consultants (Pvt) Ltd.

- Professor M T R Jayasinghe, Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of
Moratuwa.
- Eng. K L S Sahabandu, Additional General Manager-Designs, Central Engineering
Consultancy Bureau
- 41 -

SSE Earthquake Detailing Document - 01

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

SSE Earthquake Detailing Document - 01

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

REINFORCEMENT DETAILING

Society of Structural Engineers

Practicing Structural Engineers and Teachers of Structural Engineering at Universities in

Professor Priyan Dias

Longitude Latitude Distance to

2. Conventional Structures in Sri Lanka

3. Earthquake Resistant Design Criteria

- minor earthquakes without damage

4. Desirable Structural Forms and Planning Practice for Reinforced

1. It should be approximately symmetrical in plan, for example, by having strong elements

Above aspects are discussed in detail in Sections 4.1 to 4.7.

4.1 Effects of Shape of the Structure

4.2 Effects of Eccentric Cores

4.3 Effect of Elongated Buildings

4.4 Effect of Strength Distribution

4.5 Effect of Relative Strength of Beams and Columns

4.6 Effect of Inappropriate Detailing of Non-structural Members

4.7 Effect of Adjacent Buildings

Figure 4.1: Geometrically symmetric Irregular Structures

Figure 4.4(a): Vertical Irregularities due to Different Adjacent Storey Heights

Figure 4.5: Vertical Irregularities due to Set Backs

5. Detailing of Structures for Enhanced Ductility

- Inadequate strength and stiffness of the overall seismic resisting system

6.1 General Considerations

6.1.1 Desirable Planning of Buildings

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR MULTI-

Gaps between adjacent buildings

Note 6.1: Desirable Planning of Buildings

6.1.1.1 Effect of Gaps between Adjacent Buildings

Insufficient gap creates Adequate gap prevents

Figure 6.1: Pounding of Buildings

Figure 6.2: Failure of Buildings due to Pounding

6.1.1.2 Effect on Cantilevers and Balconies

Figure 6.3: Failure of a Balcony

6.1.1.3 Effect of Soft Stories

COLUMN FAILURE DUE TO SOFT STOREY

Figure 6.4: Failure due to Soft Storey Effect

6.1.2 Desirable Structural Forms

6.1.3 Properties of Materials

Average yield strength from tests <=1.3 fy

Average rupture strength from tests >=1.25 fy

Butt welds in main reinforcement and welding of

Note 6.3: Material Properties for Higher Ductility

6.2 Member Sizes and Reinforcement Detailing

Following guidelines can be generally followed in selecting member dimensions and

Stirrups & Crossties

Crossties may have a 900 hook and a 1350 hook

Crossties should be alternatively staggered both

Diameter (Φ) of Stirrups and crossties should be

Stirrup or hoop Crosstie

Stirrups & crossties for columns, beam-column joints

beam confinement zones and wall end zones

Shape of stirrups & crossties

Figure 6.5: Desirable Shapes for Links

Failure at foot of column due to 900 hook

6.2.2.1 Column Dimensions

(2) Cross sectional area of column >= 75000mm2

(4) Ac >= Ndmax/(0.50 fck)

Column sizing ctd

(1) b >= 250mm

(2) bh >= 75000mm2

h (3) Φ >= 300mm

(4) Ac >= Ndmax / (0.50fck)