Heritage Masonry Structures: Gujarat Earthquake, January 2001

Gujarat Earthquake, January 2001
Heritage Masonry
Structures
Damage to Heritage Structures

Rao Lakhaji
Chhatri,
Bhuj, 18th
century AD
Durgesh C. Rai
Professor
Ranajit Vilas
Palace,
Wankaner,
1914 AD
Department of Civil Engineering

Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur
CE625A/Masonry Structures/Dr Durgesh Rai/IITKanpur
Kanpur 208 016

25,000 heritage properties in 250
towns of which 15,500
extensively damaged or lost.
Side Bashir's Minars,

(Shaking Minars)
Ahmedabad,
10th century AD
In Kachchh alone, out of 250

major monumental structures,
40% badly damaged or
collapsed and only 10% are
unharmed.
Restraining
steel rope
Ranajit Vilas Palace,

Wankaner
CE625A/Masonry Structures/Dr Durgesh Rai/IIT Kanpur/2014
Wisdom of Ancient Architects

Structures standing even after 5000 years indicate their
perfection in construction and ability to withstand
earthquakes and other forces of nature
Seven Principles of Seismic Resistance

Seismic isolation
Deformability
Reduced mass
We may not know the exact thoughts of ancient architects

and builders regarding seismic protection and how they
generalized the past experience
May not have considered earthquake loads as a separate
entity from dead, live, wind or snow loads, as we do today.
Considerable insight can be gained by analyzing the
ancient structures from present day knowledge of
earthquake resistance of structures
Symmetry
Closed
contour
Solid
foundation
Harmony
of proportions
Three Different Approaches

Increase lateral strength
Resist earthquake forces of expected level without
damage
Reinforce at a cost not too expensive
CONVENTIONAL
Reduce transmission of ground motion

Weaken ties between building and foundation
Sand strata, Clay cushions, Rush belts, Sliding
belts of metallic plates, rubber, etc.
PASSIVE CONTROL
Modify dynamic characteristics of buildings during

motion
Equipped with certain arrangement which alter
characteristics of buildings when gets in resonance
with motion and move out of that state.
Seismic
Resistance
ACTIVE CONTROL
Early Structures: Dolmens

Simple Structure
Ten stones and plates/slabs thoroughly
fitted to each other
Stiffness and mass distributed uniformly
Flexible and deformable
First ductile and then stiff non-linear
system
Bearing joints have ductile hinges which

permits a certain displacement and then
plates butt against each other to form ties
to limit displacement amplitude of shaking
~2m
Structural integrity
Integration of structural elements takes
precedence over reduced-mass principle.
~2m
Early Structures: Pyramids
Early Structures: Cyclopians
Pyramid, Egypt, ~ 2500 BC

Local stones along Northern banks of
Nile make inner core
Stepped coursed masonry act as buttress
White limestones for outer casing

Slope is 52 degrees
Height ~ 2/3 of side of square base
Natural slopes caused by gravity, typical
for mountains
No mortars unless blocks are small

Earthquake-resistant features
Uniform distribution of mass and
rigidity
Symmetry
Lowered c.g.
Compact
proportions
CE625A/Masonry
Structures/Dr length
Durgesh Rai/IITKanpur
Un-mortared unshaped blocks, Ancient Greeks
Great Pyramid of Cheops

2623 BC
Achieving stability under its own weight is difficult if blocks are small
Bonded to each other by gravity
In places of importance, vertical dowels used along horizontal seams
Sacsahuaman
Early Structures
Post and Lintel Construction
Sacsahuaman, Cuzco, Peru, 1423 AD

Mortarless stonework, Inca
Achieving stability under its own weight

Bonded to each other by gravity
Lateral strength by friction alone
Early Structures: Cyclopians

Post and Lintel Construction

Burial chambers
Four stones to create 3 m by 3 m aperture

Lintel 4.5 long and weighs 20 tons
Nine plates for each lintel beam

Top slabs lean to form an unloading
system and work as simplified vault
Corbelling over stone lintel to relieve the

tension load on lintel due to bending
Distribution of stresses
5.8 m
Void above lintel is closed by triangular

stone.
Lion Gate, Mycenae, 1600 BC
5.2 m
Kings Burial Chamber
Corbelled Domes and Vaults
Foundations
Structures founded on large
platforms
Level grounds created on hill
sides
Vaults requiring centering

Corbelled dome, early Greeks
Sand-gravel layer formed

between ground bedding and
structure foundation
Uniform distribution of loads
and damping of earthquake
shocks
Vaults using end walls and previous

construction for stability
Ziggurat, Ur
First structural failure?

Outer casing stones of the first
pyramid of Meidum were shed in
an earthquake
A case of first
structural failure of
foundation and its
solution?
The failure led the slope of pyramid

of Dahsur still under construction
to be revised from 52o to a flatter
and more stable slope of 43.5o.
Pyramid of MEIDUM
SAND
43.5o
However, all other later pyramids

were constructed with the natural
slope of 52o
First pyramid of MEIDUM

52o
Bent Pyramid of Dahsur
Horizontal setting of stones made

it easier to slide and fall to ground
in an earthquake.

Corner stone blocks
are held in place by
dowels and sockets
Plan Symmetry
3
Parthenon, Athens,
Ancient Greek Doric,
477- 438 BC
ROCK
Later pyramids
In all later pyramids
foundation reach to bedrock
and casings are set in layers
inclined inward.
Ancient walls
Walls are faced with burnt bricks
Adobe bricks bonded by clay or bitumen
Each 5-13 layers placed in a mat
impregnated with bitumen
Thick mortar bed-joints
Lime mortars in 1000 BC
Weaker and plastic mortars
Elasto-plastic behaviour
Energy absorption in central part
composed of soft bricks held by
clay and bitumen
Use of buttresses
Connecting Masonry Units
Roman
Brick masonry
Erchetheum, Acropolis, Athens
Egyptian
Brick masonry
Stone blocks are tied by metallic cramps,

resinous wooden plugs and often lead
sealed
Prevents separation and also concentrates
the separation along a line
Connecting Masonry Units
Stabilized walls
Knassos Palace, 1500 BC
Stone dove-tail joints
Metallic cramps
Horizontal and vertical

reinforcing stones with
wooden beams
Super-strong arch and

brick-masonry layers in
stone masonry
Stabilized masonry walls
Stabilized walls
Brick-nogged
structure in timber
frames
Theodosian Land Walls, 500 AD,

Byzantine
Horizontal bands called Hatil
In-filled timber frames

Central America
Stabilized masonry walls

Earthquake-resistance mechanism
Columns
Monolithic in stone or superposed
drums connected by dowels, no mortar.
Acts as both a vertical and horizontal shock

absorber (e.g. wood is more compressible
than the surrounding masonry).
Frictional resistance prevented them

from sliding during earthquakes
assisted by wooden plug sealed in lead
Functions as a slip plane that minimizes the

tensile and the compressive forces generated
during lateral movement.
Horizontal tie member all around the
building at a common level to resist tensile
forces.
Dhajji-Dwari and Taq system

Kashmir, India
Damping by softer lead
Bahareque system
El Salvador
Rigid horizontal "girder" member that acts in

such a way as to maintain the building's
overall configuration even if the walls were
to undergo a degree of lateral shift.
Columns
Columns
Stones columns can not be imparted
enough flexibility
In rocking motion, natural frequency

reduces as amplitude of vibration
increases and overturning is more
likely but the system moves out of
the predominant frequency of
ground motion
Brick pillars can be made flexible by means

of mortars (widely used in 1100 AD)
Light wooden columns

Hinged at both ends
No bending
Bolster reduces space between
columns
Tall and slender columns are at less

risk because of the low natural
frequency
Loads from floors are transferred to

perimeter walls
Juma Mosque, 1000 AD
Corbelled Dome
Corbelling lancet (pointed) domes
5 m tall, 212 columns for 55 m by 46 m plan
Corbelled Dome
When underground the resistance
Mortar joints prevent horizontal

rings from enlargening
offered against lateral movement

by mortars is greatly enhanced by
surrounding soil.
Largest block at bottom

13.2 m high and 14.5 m diameter
Good proportions
Axial symmetry
Reduced weight with
height
Elimination of stress
concentration at openings
Tomb of Atreus, Mycenae, 1400 BC
Strong material with

possible displacement
along horizontal seams of
dry-laid masonry
ANCIENT TOMB
Hemispherical Domes
Domes for Square Areas
Form-resistant structures
Tension develops in
bottom 60% of dome
height
Comp.
Tension
System of domes,
pendentiums, arches,
thick wall, and buttresses
0.6 H
Very rigid and therefore

sensitive to differential
movement and
earthquake forces
Comp.
Comp.
Shallow Masonry Domes
St. Hagia Sophia, Istanbul, 537 AD, Byzantine

Partially collapsed in 553, 557, 989 and 1436 always due to earthquakes
Brick laid with mortar prepared of lime, crushed brick and sand.
Non-Uniform Rigidity
Architects Anthemius of Tralles and Isodones of Miletus probably knew that
material was weak in tension and need to be buttressed.
Christian liturgy required church in shape of cross of unequal arms which
led to non-uniform buttressing
Finally stabilized by Swiss architects Gaspar and Giusppe Fossati in 1847-49.
Hagia Sophia Dome
553 and 557 earthquakes

Eastern arch, half dome and and main
dome partially damaged
Insufficient buttressing and slow setting
of lime mortar
Isidorus rebuilt main dome in near
hemi-sphere, raising 20 feet, reducing
thrust by 30%
989 earthquake
Western arch and half dome collapsed
Buttresses on N-S direction
1346 earthquake
Second collapse of eastern arch
1847
Circled main dome with iron chain by
Fossati brothers
Large bricks laid

almost flat, partly
corbelled
Decreased thickness
to reduce weight
Dome constructed
with lightweight
materials, brick,
pumice, pottery
Masonry ribs
increase strength of
dome
Windows in dome
to induce radial
cracking and reduce
weight
Pendentive for
transition from
square base to
circular dome
Windows in nonstructural infill

walls
Massive primary
structural elements
Masonry domes
Masonry Domes
1.2 m
Pantheon, Rome, 123 AD, Roman

44 m dia. dome in brick and concrete not
exceeded by any masonry dome till today
For strength and flexibility two tied

system of bricks were embedded in
concrete body of the dome
Thick walls in relation to span to keep

thrust surface inside the dome
Niches reduce weight of walls by onethird and create eight interconnected
masonry piers
140 cells in domes reduce the weight
further
Lighter aggregates (tuff and pumice) near
the top while hard travertine stone near
base
Pantheon, Rome, 123 AD, Roman
44 m
7m
Ribs of skeletons rest on arches spanning

wall piers
Internal Brick Skeleton
Provides elasticity and uniformity of

strength
Plastic mortars with volcanic sand
External Brick Skeleton

Masonry domes
Masonry domes
Florence Cathedral, 1296-1462 AD,
Italian Renaissance
44 m diameter
Self weight = 17.5 kPa,
D/t =30
Compare with modern RC
construction
200 mm thick
5 kPa self weight
D/t = 300
Counteract ring tension by reinforcing in case of thin walls

Many European domes are in chains for stability under lateral loads!
Masonry domes
Masonry domes
External dome
weathering
Florence Cathedral, 12961462 AD, Italian

Renaissance
Main structural
dome
Stiffened with main
8 arched ribs with
further network of
radial and vertical
elements
Tie Beam
Rings of sandstone
blocks cramped
together with leadcovered, iron ties to
prevent dome from
spreading
St. Peter Cathedral, 1533 AD,

Rome
Shape is ellipsoidal,
elongated upward, arrowshaped.
Reduces thrust and provides
smooth transition between
dome and drum
Lighter double dome
structure
2.7 m
Surrounding semidomes buttress base

of the drum
80 m
42 m
Michaelangelo
Sangello
Masonry domes
Oljaytu Mausoleum, 1307-1313 AD,
Azerbaijan
Brick masonry lancet dome, 23.3 m
in dia and 20 m high
Double shell with stiffening ribs
Evolution of Masonry Domes
Moderate size
Little arrow-shaped
Thrust by arches of
niches
Thrust resisted by three metallic

hoops in reinforced ring at base of
the dome and vaulted gallery
encircling the dome
Smooth transition between dome
and vertical walls
Increased span
Ribbed dome
Double dome
External is
thrustless type
Masonry domes
Masonry domes
Tajmahal, 1600 AD, Agra
Tajmahal, 1600 AD, Agra
Onion shaped dome

Inside surface is different from outside
Inward overlap is balanced by its outside
thickening
Self-balanced system
Brick Masonry Construction

Marble facia
Masonry scaffolding
Increased span and height

Double dome
External is trustless type
Domes
Domes
St. Peters, Rome,

1546 AD
St. Pauls, London,
1710 AD
200 ft
Superdome,
New Orleans,
1975
200 ft
Pantheon, Rome,
123 AD
Hagia Sophia,
Istanbul, 537 AD
Flying Buttresses
Flying Buttresses
Barrel Vaults
Arched Gate
Bara Imambara
At 50 by 16 m and over 15 m tall,

is one of the largest such arched
constructions in the world.
Thrustless Roofs
Arched Gate
Rumi Darwaza , Lucknow
Sarkhej, Ahmedabad, 1462 AD
Thrustless Roofs
Indian Temples
Darbargarh,
Halvad,
16th Century
Sign of column rocking in

Gujarat Earthquake, January
2001.
Mukteshwar Temple, 950-1000 AD
Gopeshwar Temple, 1100 AD

Survived 1997 Chamoli earthquake
Indian Temples
Simple and symmetric structure
Baffled walls
Squinches and corbelling
Metal cramps
Finished stones laid in flexible
lime/organic mortars
Indian Temples
Spire over sanctum
Convex profile
Vertical channels are deep
abutting and buttressing the wall
Hypostyle Pavillion (Jagmohan)
Pyramidal roof structures
Small area covered for a huge
amount of masonry
Corbelling
Squinching (stone beams set
diagonally across beams)
Brahmeswar Temple, 1075 AD

Indian Temples
Indian Temples
Evolution of Corbelled Roofs
Konark Temple, 1278 AD

Large proportions
70 m tall spire destroyed
in 1837
Surviving 36 m by 36 m
and 40 m tall Jagmohan is
the largest internal space
in Hindu architecture
8th century AD
9th century AD
12th century AD
Gradually increased number of pidas (succession of cantilevered

horizontal levels)
36 m
Timber structures
Wooden Pagodas
35 m tall, 3 storeys, diminishing
size with height
Ise-Sun Goddess Temple, 300 AD, Japan

Nearly perfect structure for earthquake
resistance
Central round pole (0.9 m dia.)

free to stand on a stone
foundation
Two heavy posts arranged along main axis

which support heavy longitudinal squared
beam.
Frame and skeletons are loosely connected
in differ in rigidity
Poles dug deep in ground act as flexible
ties and not coupled with each other at the
ground level
Kinkaku Zen Temple,

1397 AD
Joints are flexible (hinged)

Two dynamic systems:
Internal flexible pole
External skeleton (perimeter
poles, and floor/roof system)
Light roofing of brushed straw
Storeys are formed with

horizontal networking of
perimeter poles and corbelled
cornices
Yakusidzi, 680 AD
Wooden Pagodas
Wooden Pagodas
Pagoda Sakya Muni, China, 1056 AD
66.6 m tall
Inner rooms in first story laid in brick
Triangular truss dictates

straight pitch for the roof and
thrust on rafters
Post-lintel frames and series

of brackets support pitched
roof with overhanging evaes.
Thrustless roof system
Brackets work like seesaw

Roof load bears down on its
upper end and lower end rises to
support the eave
56 variations in Chinese Yinxian
pagoda, 11th century AD!
Wooden upper floors rest on

octahedron masonry
Joints are flexible (hinged) so that all 9
storeys are free to move
Heavy metallic stupa at the top over a
brick platform (acting as an oscillator!)
Shaken at the rigid base platform, the

vibration amplitudes die out with height
Closing Remarks
Closing Remarks
We build with faith that our structures

will last forever, but the forces of nature
and human errors often conspire to
confound our optimism and cause
structural failures.
Closing Remarks
Closing Remarks
Ancient structures show that earthquake

protection is a rather wider concept than
mere reinforcement and use of strong
materials.
Attempts have been on saving

buildings from earthquakes and
enhancing durability.
They use all three major concepts of seismic

protection as we know today
Sufficiently strong and elastic behavior
Passive protection of deformability,
damping and isolation
Active protection with changing load
carrying mechanism
It is important to study these

structures in-depth in order to
develop comprehensive set of
schemes for seismic protection and
restoration projects, which are
compatible with the load-resisting
mechanisms of the original structure.

Heritage Masonry Structures: Gujarat Earthquake, January 2001

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Heritage Masonry Structures: Gujarat Earthquake, January 2001

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gujarat Earthquake, January 2001

Damage to Heritage Structures

Department of Civil Engineering

CE625A/Masonry Structures/Dr Durgesh Rai/IITKanpur

Gujarat Earthquake, January 2001

Gujarat Earthquake, January 2001

Damage to Heritage Structures

Damage to Heritage Structures

Side Bashir's Minars,

In Kachchh alone, out of 250

Ranajit Vilas Palace,

CE625A/Masonry Structures/Dr Durgesh Rai/IIT Kanpur/2014

CE625A/Masonry Structures/Dr Durgesh Rai/IITKanpur

Wisdom of Ancient Architects

Seven Principles of Seismic Resistance

We may not know the exact thoughts of ancient architects

CE625A/Masonry Structures/Dr Durgesh Rai/IITKanpur

Three Different Approaches

Reduce transmission of ground motion

Modify dynamic characteristics of buildings during

Early Structures: Dolmens

Bearing joints have ductile hinges which

CE625A/Masonry Structures/Dr Durgesh Rai/IITKanpur

CE625A/Masonry Structures/Dr Durgesh Rai/IIT Kanpur/2014

CE625A/Masonry Structures/Dr Durgesh Rai/IITKanpur

Early Structures: Pyramids

Early Structures: Cyclopians

Pyramid, Egypt, ~ 2500 BC

White limestones for outer casing

No mortars unless blocks are small

Un-mortared unshaped blocks, Ancient Greeks

Great Pyramid of Cheops

Sacsahuaman, Cuzco, Peru, 1423 AD

Achieving stability under its own weight

CE625A/Masonry Structures/Dr Durgesh Rai/IIT Kanpur/2014

CE625A/Masonry Structures/Dr Durgesh Rai/IITKanpur

Early Structures: Cyclopians

Early Structures: Pyramids

Four stones to create 3 m by 3 m aperture

Nine plates for each lintel beam

Corbelling over stone lintel to relieve the

Void above lintel is closed by triangular

Kings Burial Chamber

CE625A/Masonry Structures/Dr Durgesh Rai/IITKanpur

Corbelled Domes and Vaults

Vaults requiring centering

Sand-gravel layer formed

CE625A/Masonry Structures/Dr Durgesh Rai/IITKanpur

Vaults using end walls and previous

CE625A/Masonry Structures/Dr Durgesh Rai/IIT Kanpur/2014

CE625A/Masonry Structures/Dr Durgesh Rai/IITKanpur

Early Structures: Pyramids

Early Structures: Pyramids

First structural failure?

The failure led the slope of pyramid

However, all other later pyramids

First pyramid of MEIDUM

Bent Pyramid of Dahsur

CE625A/Masonry Structures/Dr Durgesh Rai/IITKanpur

Horizontal setting of stones made

Early Structures: Pyramids

CE625A/Masonry Structures/Dr Durgesh Rai/IITKanpur

CE625A/Masonry Structures/Dr Durgesh Rai/IIT Kanpur/2014