Dipendra GAUTAM

INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABILITY (IRIS), KATHMANDU, NEPAL

Genesis and Motivation (or Abstract) (a)

(b) (f)
Nepal’s history dates back to several thousands of years and several civilizations existed across the territory. The oldest
housing practice in Nepal is considered as the Buddhist Vihara wherein the Buddha was born and the remains exist
until now. Nepal’s construction practices are advanced in both historical/monumental constructions as well as
SCIENCE, INFORMATION AND residential constructions. Being situated in one of the most active seismic region of the world, earthquakes occur
(m)
TECHNOLOGY NATIONAL frequently across Nepal however the constructions are not compliant with adequate seismic demand. Seismic safety of
(c)
structures is toddling topic for Nepal in policy, academics and research level. Moreover, seismic safety of structures of (g)
YOUTH CONFERENCE all type has not gotten adequate attention in public to policy levels leading to devastations in case of strong
earthquakes. For instance, the 1934 Bihar-Nepal earthquake (M 8.1) destroyed 81000 structures across central and
eastern Nepal and 120000 more structures were partly damaged. The earthquake of 1988 (M 6.9) caused destruction in
JUNE 15-17, 2018 66000 buildings in eastern Nepal meanwhile the 2011 earthquake (M 6.9) caused damage in 15000 structures in the
eastern region. Of late, a strong earthquake of magnitude 7.8 struck central and eastern Nepal damaging 750000 (h)
buildings in total. The known history of earthquake in Nepal dates back to 1255 and frequent events are documented in (l)
scriptures in Nepal. It is clearly indicated by every earthquake in Nepal, current structural design and construction (d)
practices do not possess adequate seismic safety or life safety thus damage is very high when compared with
earthquakes of similar magnitude in Japan and Chile. In order depict the status and performance of structures during
earthquakes, vulnerability identification and development of fragility models are instrumental. (i)

(e)

Objectives (k)
(j)
 Dynamics of housing development in Nepal
 Vulnerability depiction among building forms
in Nepal
 Structural sustainability of building forms in
Nepal
Fig. 2 Genesis and dynamics of housing structures in Nepal

Table 1. Vulnerability of Buildings in Nepal

Buildings (%)
Most likely
3.38
vulnerability
Buildings Building description
9.94 class
24.9
17.57 (EMS-98 scale)
- Historic >2500 years old masonry structure (Vihara)
where the Buddha was born
a B
- Very heavy walls and massive construction

44.21
- Temple constructed in between 4 th to 5th century

b - Majority of construction is done with metals (gold) D

RC Masonry (cement mortar) Masonry (mud mortar) Timber Others
- Not affected by any of the historical earthquakes in
Fig. 3 Distribution of housing types in Nepal Nepal

- Medieval construction (Pagoda style) developed and

propagated across south east Asia and China
Fig. 1 Vulnerability grading in EMS-98 Scale
c - Mixed construction (brick masonry and timber) D

Table 2. Sustainability analysis of building forms based on ASCE (2010) parameters

- Mortar: lime mortar with cereals and honey
Parametric sustainability (ASCE 2010)

Reuse of buildings, structural Structural d - Massive medieval stone construction (Shikhara style) C
Buildings Local resources and Durability and reduced Design of adaptability and Life cycle
Recycling components and non-buildings materials and
production (<100 miles) maintenance deconstruction assessment
structures toxicity
- 20th century construction strongly influenced from
Greek and Roman architectural forms

  
Not possible due to use of bricks and
a
improved mud-mortar
Not possible × × - Majority of the constructions are mixed (use of timber
e elements at times) B

 
Gold can be recycled but not the - Severely damaged during every notable earthquake
b
masonry units
Partly Partly × ×
after the inception of this structural form

  
Not possible: both timber and bricks Partly the heartwood timber but
c × ×
undergo decay not the bricks and tiles
- Wattle and daub is one of the oldest housing practice
in Nepal

   
Adaptability is remarkable but
d × ×
constructability is low f - Simple and light construction with locally available D
materials like bamboo and straw

Questionable durability;
 
Not possible: both timber and bricks - Damage is not generally noted in such structures
e
undergo decay
timely strengthening is × × × during historical earthquakes
needed

- Stone masonry houses constitute largest fraction of

f ×  ×  × × × overall buildings in Nepal (~60%)

g ×  ×  × × × - This construction technology is developed in middle

mountains and high mountains where climatic conditions
h ×  ×  × × × demand greater wall thickness
g A
  
Generally, no, but the heartwood
i × component can be
× ×
- Most vulnerable structures during every earthquake

j ×  ×  × × ×
k × Non-local: re-bars × × × × × - Random and non-engineered constructions

l Steel and glasses can be recycled ×  ×  × ×

- Little fraction of buildings is constituted by adobe
m × × × × × × × houses in Nepal

h A
- Practiced since early civilization
Materials and Methods
Historical scriptures have been reviewed to delineate the dynamics of the housing development in Nepal. - Severely damaged by earthquake

Thereafter the constructions are classified into respective vulnerability classes using EMS-98 scale (Fig. 1). For
classification, forensic approach, visual interpretations and previous field investigations are implemented. - Excellent housing forms in southern plains of Nepal

Exacting classifications wherever not applicable, nearest classification is adopted because some of the - Not affected by any of the earthquake
i E
structural forms practiced in Nepal are not represented by EMS-98 classification system. In addition to this,
- Locally available timber posts are used as structural
sustainability parameters are assessed on the basis of ASCE (2010) considerations. systems and bamboo sheets are used as infill properly
nailed with the diaphragm

- Brick masonry buildings are found in plains to middle

Results and Conclusions j

mountains where quality of clay is better and historical
centers are located
B
The generalized housing dynamics is formulated with historical evidences and available records (Fig. 2). - Such buildings are badly affected by every earthquake

According to the vulnerability criteria, it is found that about 95% of building stocks in Nepal (Fig. 3) fall under in Nepal

vulnerability classes A to C and a small fraction of buildings can be classified into vulnerability classes D and - RC building practice was started in Nepal after 1967

E (Table 1). This depicts the inherent vulnerability and possible destruction during strong earthquakes in
- Majority of the buildings are substandard (~90% of
Nepal as reinforced by the evidences from 1934, 1988, 2011 and 2015 events. Apart from this, it is concluded k total RC) C

that an important aspect of sustainability; life cycle assessment is lacking in Nepal (Table 2). Dependence of
- Severe damage was observed in such structures (both
local materials is found to be in decreasing order in most of the recent constructions too. Tables 1 and 2 depict near and far field) during Gorkha earthquake
that during strong earthquakes damage severe structural damage can be expected in Nepal and post
earthquake reconstruction in terms of recyclability and reusability is impossible. This may impose additional - Middle rise commercial/residential structures are
practice after 2000 in Nepal
challenge in the environment if not thoroughly accounted for design, construction and reconstruction process.
- Infill walls are either brick masonry walls, otherwise
l glass panels D

Ongoing and Future Works Reference - Moderate provisions are provided during design of
such structures
 Derivation of empirical fragility functions for existing  ASCE (American Society of Civil - Majority of the deficiencies are associated with
structures Engineers) 2010. “Sustainability Guidelines construction fallacies

 Derivation of analytical fragility models for RC for the Structural Engineer,” DM Kestner, J - Limited structures are towers (generally of apartment
purpose)
building classes Goupil and E Lorenz (eds.), ASCE. m E
- Well-designed frames but not adequately designed
LALITPUR, NEPAL walls

SCIENCE, INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE 2018 (SITNYC-2018)

JUNE 15-17, 2018 LALITPUR, NEPAL